Dopamine antagonism does not impair learning of Pavlovian conditioned approach to manipulable or non-manipulable cues but biases responding towards goal tracking

Critical periods when dopamine controls behavioral responding during Pavlovian learning

RATIONALE

Learning the association between rewards and predictive cues is critical for appetitive behavioral responding. The mesolimbic dopamine system is thought to play an integral role in establishing these cue-reward associations. The dopamine response to cues can signal differences in reward value, though this emerges only after significant training. This suggests that the dopamine system may differentially regulate behavioral responding depending on the phase of training.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether antagonizing dopamine receptors elicited different effects on behavior depending on the phase of training or the type of Pavlovian task.

METHODS

Separate groups of male rats were trained on Pavlovian tasks in which distinct audio cues signaled either differences in reward size or differences in reward rate. The dopamine receptor antagonist flupenthixol was systemically administered prior to either the first ten sessions of training (acquisition phase) or the second ten sessions of training (expression phase), and we monitored the effect of these manipulations for an additional ten training sessions.

RESULTS

We identified acute effects of dopamine receptor antagonism on conditioned responding, the latency to respond, and post-reward head entries in both Pavlovian tasks. Interestingly, dopamine receptor antagonism during the expression phase produced persistent deficits in behavioral responding only in rats trained on the reward size Pavlovian task.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, our results illustrate that dopamine's control over behavior in Pavlovian tasks depends upon one's prior training experience and the information signaled by the cues.

Sign- and goal-tracking score does not correlate with addiction-like behavior following prolonged cocaine self-administration

RATIONALE

In classical conditioning, sign-tracking reflects behavior directed toward a conditioned stimulus (CS) in expectation of a reward (unconditioned stimulus, US); in contrast, goal-tracking describes behavior directed toward the location of delivery of a US. As cues previously paired with drugs of abuse promote drug-seeking and drug-taking behavior in both animals and humans and thus contribute to the severity of substance abuse, sign-tracking may represent a maladaptive cue-focused behavior that may increase addiction vulnerability as compared to goal-tracking. Recent studies do, in fact, support this possibility. Previous work in this area has focused primarily on paradigms using relatively limited exposure to drug rather than extended drug intake.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we used the DSM-IV-based 3-criteria (3-CRIT) model and examined whether a relationship exists between sign- or goal-tracking phenotypes and the prevalence of criteria associated with addiction-like behavior following extended cocaine self-administration as measured in this model.

METHODS

Forty-six male Sprague Dawley rats underwent a Pavlovian conditioned approach (PCA) procedure and were characterized along a continuum as goal-trackers (GTs), intermediates (INTs), or sign-trackers (STs). The animals were subsequently trained to intravenous self-administer cocaine during 45 self-administration (SA) sessions and characterized for the 3 criteria outlined in the model: persistence of drug-seeking, motivation for cocaine-taking, and resistance to punishment.

RESULTS

We performed correlational analyses on the traits measured, finding no relationships between PCA score and addiction-like characteristics measured using the 3-CRIT model of addiction. However, STs showed significantly greater resistance to punishment than GTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Phenotyping along a continuum of PCA scores may not be a valid predictor for identifying vulnerability to the addiction-like behaviors examined using the 3-CRIT model. However, PCA phenotype may predict a single feature of the 3-CRIT model, resistance to punishment, among those rats classified as either STs or GTs.

Mapping sign-tracking and goal-tracking onto human behaviors

As evidenced through classic Pavlovian learning mechanisms, environmental cues can become incentivized and influence behavior. These stimulus-outcome associations are relevant in everyday life but may be particularly important for the development of impulse control disorders including addiction. Rodent studies have elucidated specific learning profiles termed 'sign-tracking' and 'goal-tracking' which map onto individual differences in impulsivity and other behaviors associated with impulse control disorders' etiology, course, and relapse. Whereas goal-trackers are biased toward the outcome, sign-trackers fixate on features that are associated with but not necessary for achieving an outcome; a pattern of behavior that often leads to escalation of reward-seeking that can be maladaptive. The vast majority of the sign- and goal-tracking research has been conducted using rodent models and very few have bridged this concept into the domain of human behavior. In this review, we discuss the attributes of sign- and goal-tracking profiles, how these are manifested neurobiologically, and how these distinct learning styles could be an important tool for clinical interventions in human addiction.

Sign- and goal-tracking rats show differences in various executive functions: Authors

Sign tracking (ST) is a complex Pavlovian trait that is known to impact instrumental behaviour. Recent work suggests that this trait also correlates with altered top-down executive control relative to goal tracking (GT) rats. This raises the question as to the extent to which both phenotypes differ in executive functions. Moreover, it is unclear which cognitive processes might cause potential differences between ST and GT rats. We therefore compared the behaviour of ST and GT rats in several assays, such as outcome devaluation, attentional set shifting and reversal learning, conditional responding, as well as delayed alternation to measure different aspects of executive functioning. Goal-directed behaviour per se was not different between ST and GT rats in the outcome devaluation task. ST rats performed slightly better than GT rats in one condition of the set shifting task (place->cue shift) and the delayed alternation task, but did not perform as well in the conditional responding task. Thus, differential behavioural performance between ST and GT rats was dependent on the specific task context. Further, we found evidence that the differences in executive functions are likely related to increased incentive salience attribution and impulsive action in ST rats.

Impacts of inter-trial interval duration on a computational model of sign-tracking vs. goal-tracking behaviour

In the context of Pavlovian conditioning, two types of behaviour may emerge within the population (Flagel et al. Nature, 469(7328): 53-57, 2011). Animals may choose to engage either with the conditioned stimulus (CS), a behaviour known as sign-tracking (ST) which is sensitive to dopamine inhibition for its acquisition, or with the food cup in which the reward or unconditioned stimulus (US) will eventually be delivered, a behaviour known as goal-tracking (GT) which is dependent on dopamine for its expression only. Previous work by Lesaint et al. (PLoS Comput Biol, 10(2), 2014) offered a computational explanation for these phenomena and led to the prediction that varying the duration of the inter-trial interval (ITI) would change the relative ST-GT proportion in the population as well as phasic dopamine responses. A recent study verified this prediction, but also found a rich variance of ST and GT behaviours within the trial which goes beyond the original computational model. In this paper, we provide a computational perspective on these novel results.

Disconnection of basolateral amygdala and insular cortex disrupts conditioned approach in Pavlovian lever autoshaping

Previously established individual differences in appetitive approach and devaluation sensitivity observed in goal- and sign-trackers may be attributed to differences in the acquisition, modification, or use of associative information in basolateral amygdala (BLA) pathways. Here, we sought to determine the extent to which communication of associative information between BLA and anterior portions of insular cortex (IC) supports ongoing Pavlovian conditioned approach behaviors in sign- and goal-tracking rats, in the absence of manipulations to outcome value. We hypothesized that the BLA mediates goal-, but not sign- tracking approach through interactions with the IC, a brain region involved in supporting flexible behavior. We first trained rats in Pavlovian lever autoshaping to determine their sign- or goal-tracking tendency. During alternating test sessions, we gave unilateral intracranial injections of vehicle or a cocktail of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists, baclofen and muscimol, unilaterally into the BLA and contralaterally or ipsilaterally into the IC prior to reinforced lever autoshaping sessions. Consistent with our hypothesis we found that contralateral inactivation of BLA and IC increased the latency to approach the food cup and decreased the number of food cup contacts in goal-trackers. While contralateral inactivation of BLA and IC did not affect the total number of lever contacts in sign-trackers, this manipulation increased the latency to approach the lever. Ipsilateral inactivation of BLA and IC did not impact approach behaviors in Pavlovian lever autoshaping. These findings, contrary to our hypothesis, suggest that communication between BLA and IC maintains a representation of initially learned appetitive associations that commonly support the initiation of Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior regardless of whether it is directed at the cue or the location of reward delivery.

Adrenergic manipulation inhibits pavlovian conditioned approach behaviors

Environmental rewards and Pavlovian reward cues can acquire incentive salience, thereby eliciting incentive motivational states and instigate reward-seeking. In rats, the incentive salience of food cues can be measured during a Pavlovian conditioned approach paradigm, in which rats engage in cue-directed approach ("sign-tracking") or approach the food delivery location ("goal-tracking"). While it has been shown that dopamine signaling is necessary for sign-tracking, some studies have suggested that norepinephrine is involved in learning to sign-track as well. Thus, in order to investigate the influence of norepinephrine in Pavlovian conditioned approach, we administered three adrenergic drugs while rats learned that a food cue (an illuminated, retractable lever) preceded the delivery of banana-flavored food pellets into a food-cup. We found that pre-session injections of disulfiram (a dopamine-β-hydroxylase inhibitor) inhibited the development of sign-tracking, but goal-tracking was only affected at the high dose. In one experiment, post-session injections of disulfiram blocked the development of sign-tracking, although this effect was not replicated in a separate set of rats. Post-session injections of prazosin (an α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist) and propranolol (a β-adrenergic receptor antagonist) also blocked the development of sign-tracking but not goal-tracking. Taken together, these results suggest that adrenergic transmission mediates the acquisition of sign-tracking but not goal-tracking, and thus plays a selective role in the attribution of incentive salience food cues.

Long-lasting contribution of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens core, but not dorsal lateral striatum, to sign-tracking

The attribution of incentive salience to reward-paired cues is dependent on dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens core (NAcC). These dopamine signals conform to traditional reward-prediction error signals and have been shown to diminish with time. Here we examined whether the diminishing dopamine signal in the NAcC has functional implications for the expression of sign-tracking, a Pavlovian conditioned response indicative of the attribution of incentive salience to reward-paired cues. Food-restricted male Sprague Dawley rats were trained in a Pavlovian paradigm in which an insertable lever predicted delivery of food reward in a nearby food cup. After 7 or 14 training sessions, rats received infusions of saline, the dopamine antagonist flupenthixol, or the GABA agonists baclofen and muscimol into the NAcC or the dorsal lateral striatum (DLS). Dopamine antagonism within the NAcC attenuated sign-tracking, whereas reversible inactivation did not affect sign-tracking but increased non-specific food cup checking behaviors. Neither drug in the DLS affected sign-tracking behavior. Critically, extended training did not alter these effects. Although extended experience with an incentive stimulus may reduce cue-evoked dopamine in the NAcC, this does not remove the dependence on dopamine in this region to promote Pavlovian cue approach nor result in the recruitment of dorsal lateral striatal systems for this behavior. These data support the notion that dopamine within the mesoaccumbal system, but not the nigrostriatal system, contributes critically to incentive motivational processes independent of the length of training.