Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

HighWire full text link HighWire Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

Comparative Study
.2010 Aug 25;30(34):11493-500.
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1550-10.2010.

Target-specific encoding of response inhibition: increased contribution of AMPA to NMDA receptors at excitatory synapses in the prefrontal cortex

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Target-specific encoding of response inhibition: increased contribution of AMPA to NMDA receptors at excitatory synapses in the prefrontal cortex

Scott J Hayton et al. J Neurosci..

Abstract

Impulse control suppresses actions that are inappropriate in one context, but may be beneficial in others. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) mediates this process by providing a top-down signal to inhibit competing responses, although the mechanism by which the mPFC acquires this ability is unknown. To that end, we examined synaptic changes in the mPFC associated with learning to inhibit an incorrect response. Rats were trained in a simple response inhibition task to withhold responding until a signal was presented. We then measured synaptic plasticity of excitatory synapses in the mPFC, using whole-cell patch-clamp recordings, in brain slices prepared from trained rats. Response inhibition training significantly increased the relative contribution of AMPA receptors to the overall EPSC in prelimbic, but not infralimbic, neurons of the mPFC. This potentiation of synaptic transmission closely paralleled the acquisition and extinction of response inhibition. Using a retrograde fluorescent tracer, we observed that these plastic changes were selective for efferents projecting to the ventral striatum, but not the dorsal striatum or amygdala. Therefore, we suggest that response inhibition is encoded by a selective strengthening of a subset of corticostriatal projections, uncovering a synaptic mechanism of impulse control. This information could be exploited in therapeutic interventions for disorders of impulse control, such as addiction, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, and schizophrenia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Visual schematic of behavioral tasks with arrows indicating possible outcomes.A, The RI task requires subjects to withhold responding until the correct phase. Responses during the correct phase result in a sucrose pellet reward and reinstate the intertrial interval (ITI). Responses during the premature phase restore the ITI with no reward. Failure to respond during the correct phase results in an omission and reinstates the ITI.B, The operant control is identical to the RI task, but the lever is withdrawn during the premature phase, preventing any premature responses.C, The yoked control has identical stimuli to the RI task, but lever presses have no programmed consequence. A sucrose pellet is delivered automatically 1 s after the initiation of the correct phase.D, In the extinction task, sucrose pellets are delivered following a response in either the premature or correct phase.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Training on an RI task strengthened AMPA/NMDA in prelimbic mPFC neurons.A, Accuracy improves after training in the RI task with both 2 s (left) and 4 s (right) premature phases. Individual subject data inset.B, Learning the RI task produced larger AMPA/NMDA in the prelimbic (white bars), but not the infralimbic (black bars), region of the mPFC (#p < 0.005 vs all groups). Sample sizes for cells (above) and subjects (below) are indicated within the bars.C, Representative AMPA (black) and NMDA (gray) EPSCs from RI task and operant control neurons in the prelimbic (top) and infralimbic (bottom) cortex (calibration: 500 nA/0.1 s).D, Training on the RI task failed to enhance AMPA/NMDA when measured by focal stimulation.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Partial training produces proportional increases in AMPA/NMDA ratios. Data points represent AMPA/NMDA of neurons from subjects trained to 40% accuracy (n = 5), 60% accuracy (n = 4), or 80% accuracy (n = 4) in the RI task. Representative AMPA (black) and NMDA (gray) EPSCs for each group at right (calibration: 500 nA/0.1 s; *p < 0.05).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Extinguishing response inhibition returned AMPA/NMDA to baseline.A, Accuracy was rapidly reduced from baseline levels (day 0) in RI-task when all lever presses were reinforced (extinction). The Train group continued to perform the task without any changes in accuracy and the Pause group received equivalent days off.B, Extinction of response inhibition reduced AMPA/NMDA (Extinct group). Equivalent days without training reduced AMPA/NMDA in the Pause group, but to a lesser degree than in the Extinct group (*p < 0.05).
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Retrograde transport of fluorescent beads permits identification of neurons projecting to target areas.A, Representative image of prelimbic region under fluorescence (medial at left; dorsal at top). Lines mark approximate boundaries of layer V, box indicates magnified area of interest (scale bar: 100 μm).B,C, Prelimbic pyramidal neuron under dark-field (B) and fluorescent (C) light (scale bars: 10 μm).
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Target-specific enhancement of AMPA/NMDA after learning the RI task.A, Injections sites for subjects trained in the RI task (•), as well as operant (■) and weight (▴) controls.B, AMPA/NMDA increased in projections to the ventral striatum (left) after training in the RI task, and in projections to the dorsal striatum (center) following training in the operant control task. Projections to the basolateral amygdala (right) showed no effect of training. Sample sizes for cells (above) and subjects (below) are indicated within the bars (*p < 0.001 vs all groups).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Balleine BW, O'Doherty JP. Human and rodent homologies in action control: corticostriatal determinants of goal-directed and habitual action. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2010;35:48–69. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Balleine BW, Liljeholm M, Ostlund SB. The integrative function of the basal ganglia in instrumental conditioning. Behav Brain Res. 2009;199:43–52. - PubMed
    1. Berendse HW, Galis-de Graaf Y, Groenewegen HJ. Topographical organization and relationship with ventral striatal compartments of prefrontal corticostriatal projections in the rat. J Comp Neurol. 1992;316:314–347. - PubMed
    1. Besson M, Belin D, McNamara R, Theobald DE, Castel A, Beckett VL, Crittenden BM, Newman AH, Everitt BJ, Robbins TW, Dalley JW. Dissociable control of impulsivity in rats by dopamine d2/3 receptors in the core and shell subregions of the nucleus accumbens. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2010;35:560–569. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borgland SL, Malenka RC, Bonci A. Acute and chronic cocaine-induced potentiation of synaptic strength in the ventral tegmental area: electrophysiological and behavioral correlates in individual rats. J Neurosci. 2004;24:7482–7490. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
HighWire full text link HighWire Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp