Neural Correlates of Variations in Event Processing during Learning in Central Nucleus of Amygdala

Neuron

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 991-1001

  Calu, Donna J ^a   Roesch, Matthew R ^b   Haney, Richard Z ^a   Holland, Peter C ^c   Schoenbaum, Geoffrey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMYGDALOID NUCLEUS; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BRAIN FUNCTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVOKED RESPONSE; MALE; NERVE CELL STIMULATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RAT; REWARD; SINGLE UNIT ACTIVITY; STATE DEPENDENT LEARNING; TASK PERFORMANCE;

AMYGDALA; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; AROUSAL; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; MALE; MENTAL PROCESSES; RATS; RATS, LONG-EVANS; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE; SET (PSYCHOLOGY); TIME PERCEPTION;

EID: 78649932980     PISSN: 08966273     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.11.019     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Belova M.A., Paton J.J., Morrison S.E., Salzman C.D. Expectation modulates neural responses to pleasant and aversive stimuli in primate amygdala. Neuron 2007, 55:970-984.
2. Bucci D.J., Macleod J.E. Changes in neural activity associated with a surprising change in the predictive validity of a conditioned stimulus. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2007, 26:2669-2676.
3. Bucci D.J., Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Removal of cholinergic input to rat posterior parietal cortex disrupts incremental processing of conditioned stimuli. J. Neurosci. 1998, 18:8038-8046.
4. Chiba A.A., Bucci D.J., Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Basal forebrain cholinergic lesions disrupt increments but not decrements in conditioned stimulus processing. J. Neurosci. 1995, 15:7315-7322.
5. Groshek F., Kerfoot E., McKenna V., Polackwich A.S., Gallagher M., Holland P.C. Amygdala central nucleus function is necessary for learning, but not expression, of conditioned auditory orienting. Behav. Neurosci. 2005, 119:202-212.
6. Han J.S., Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Disconnection of the amygdala central nucleus and substantia innominata/nucleus basalis disrupts increments in conditioned stimulus processing in rats. Behav. Neurosci. 1999, 113:143-151.
7. Holland P.C. Enhanced conditioning produced by surprising increases in reinforcer value are unaffected by lesions of the amygdala central nucleus. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 2006, 85:30-35.
8. Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Amygdala central nucleus lesions disrupt increments, but not decrements, in conditioned stimulus processing. Behav. Neurosci. 1993, 107:246-253.
9. Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Effects of amygdala central nucleus lesions on blocking and unblocking. Behav. Neurosci. 1993, 107:235-245.
10. Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Amygdala circuitry in attentional and representational processes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 1999, 3:65-73.
11. Holland P.C., Kenmuir C. Variations in unconditioned stimulus processing in unblocking. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 2005, 31:155-171.
12. Holland P.C., Gallagher M. Different roles for amygdala central nucleus and substantia innominata in the surprise-induced enhancement of learning. J. Neurosci. 2006, 26:3791-3797.
13. Holland P.C., Hatfield T., Gallagher M. Rats with basolateral amygdala lesions show normal increases in conditioned stimulus processing but reduced conditioned potentiation of eating. Behav. Neurosci. 2001, 115:945-950.
14. Hollerman J.R., Schultz W. Dopamine neurons report an error in the temporal prediction of reward during learning. Nat. Neurosci. 1998, 1:304-309.
15. Hong S., Hikosaka O. The globus pallidus sends reward-related signals to the lateral habenula. Neuron 2008, 60:720-729.
16. Kaye H., Pearce J.M. The strength of the orienting response during blocking. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. B 1984, 36:131-144.
17. Lee H.J., Youn J.M., O M.J., Gallagher M., Holland P.C. Role of substantia nigra-amygdala connections in surprise-induced enhancement of attention. J. Neurosci. 2006, 26:6077-6081.
18. Lee H.J., Youn J.M., Gallagher M., Holland P.C. Temporally limited role of substantia nigra-central amygdala connections in surprise-induced enhancement of learning. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2008, 27:3043-3049.
19. Matsumoto M., Hikosaka K. Lateral habenula as a source of negative reward signals in dopamine neurons. Nature 2007, 447:1111-1115.
20. McDannald M.A., Kerfoot E.C., Gallagher M., Holland P.C. Amygdala central nucleus function is necessary for learning but not expression of conditioned visual orienting. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2004, 20:240-248.
21. Montague P.R., Dayan P., Sejnowski T.J. A framework for mesencephalic dopamine systems based on predictive Hebbian learning. J. Neurosci. 1996, 16:1936-1947.
22. Pare D., Quirk G.J., Ledoux J.E. New vistas on amygdala networks in conditioned fear. J. Neurophysiol. 2004, 92:1-9.
23. Paxinos G., Watson C. The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates, Sixth Edition 2009, Academic Press, New York.
24. Pearce J.M., Hall G. A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychol. Rev. 1980, 87:532-552.
25. Pearce J.M., Kaye H., Hall G. Predictive accuracy and stimulus associability: Development of a model for Pavlovian conditioning. Quantitative Analysis of Behavior 1982, 241-255. Ballinger, Cambridge, MA. M. Commons, R. Herrnstein, A.R. Wagner (Eds.).
26. Pearce J.M., Wilson P., Kaye H. The influence of predictive accuracy on serial conditioning in the rat. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 1988, 40B:181-198.
27. Pitkanen A. Connectivity of the rat amygdaloid complex. The Amygdala: A Functional Analysis 2000, Oxford University Press, New York. J.P. Aggleton (Ed.).
28. Rescorla R.A., Wagner A.R. A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory 1972, 64-99. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. A.H. Black, W.F. Prokasy (Eds.).
29. Roesch M.R., Calu D.J., Esber G.R., Schoenbaum G. Neural correlates of variations in event processing during learning in basolateral amygdala. J. Neurosci. 2010, 30:2464-2471.
30. Roesch M.R., Calu D.J., Schoenbaum G. Dopamine neurons encode the better option in rats deciding between differently delayed or sized rewards. Nat. Neurosci. 2007, 10:1615-1624.
31. Schultz W., Dickinson A. Neuronal coding of prediction errors. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2000, 23:473-500.
32. Schultz W., Dayan P., Montague P.R. A neural substrate for prediction and reward. Science 1997, 275:1593-1599.
33. Swan J.A., Pearce J.M. The orienting response as an index of stimulus associability in rats. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 1988, 14:292-301.
34. Swanson L.W. The projections of the ventral tegmental area and adjacent regions: A combined fluorescent retrograde tracer and immunofluorescence study in the rat. Brain Res. Bull. 1982, 9:321-353.
35. Tye K.M., Cone J.J., Schairer W.W., Janak P.H. Amygdala neural encoding in the absence of reward during extinction. J. Neurosci. 2010, 30:116-125.
36. Waelti P., Dickinson A., Schultz W. Dopamine responses comply with basic assumptions of formal learning theory. Nature 2001, 412:43-48.
37. Wallace D.M., Magnuson D.J., Gray T.S. Organization of amygdaloid projections to brainstem dopaminergic, noradrenergic, and adrenergic cell groups in the rat. Brain Res. Bull. 1992, 28:447-454.
38. Wilson P.N., Boumphrey P., Pearce J.M. Restoration of the orienting response to a light by a change in its predictive accuracy. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. B 1992, 44B:17-36.