ArticleNeuroscience2015
Distinct effects of ventral tegmental area NMDA and acetylcholine receptor blockade on conditioned reinforcement produced by food-associated cues.
Article in Neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamics of synchronous bursts in functionally coupled midbrain dopamine neurons driven by diverse excitatory inputs.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2026Article
- On the origin of the reward function: Exploring the role of conditioned reinforcement and social learning.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Muscarinic antagonists impair multiple aspects of operant discrimination learning and performance.Neuroscience letters · 2023Article
- AlphaFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Neurobiology of reward-related learning.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021Review
- NMDA Receptor-Dependent Cholinergic Modulation of Mesolimbic Dopamine Cell Bodies: Neurochemical and Behavioral Studies.ACS chemical neuroscience · 2019Article
- Cocaine, nicotine, and their conditioned contexts enhance consolidation of object memory in rats.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Opioid-induced rewards, locomotion, and dopamine activation: A proposed model for control by mesopontine and rostromedial tegmental neurons.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2017Review
- Subanesthetic ketamine decreases the incentive-motivational value of reward-related cues.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
- Ventral tegmental area muscarinic receptors modulate depression and anxiety-related behaviors in rats.Neuroscience letters · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Stimuli paired with rewards acquire reinforcing properties to promote reward-seeking behavior. Previous work supports the role of ventral tegmental area (VTA) nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in mediating conditioned reinforcement elicited by drug-associated cues. However, it is not known whether these cholinergic mechanisms are specific to drug-associated cues or whether VTA cholinergic mechanisms also underlie the ability of cues paired with natural rewards to act as conditioned reinforcers. Burst firing of VTA dopamine (DA) neurons and the subsequent phasic DA release in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) plays an important role in cue-mediated behavior and in the ability of cues to acquire reinforcing properties. In the VTA, both AChRs and N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) regulate DA burst firing and phasic DA release. Here, we tested the role of VTA nAChRs, muscarinic AChRs (mAChRs), and NMDARs in the conditioned reinforcement elicited by a food-associated, natural reward cue. Subjects received 10 consecutive days of Pavlovian conditioning training where lever extension served as a predictive cue for food availability. On day 11, rats received bilateral VTA infusion of saline, AP-5 (0.1 or 1μg), mecamylamine (MEC: 3 or 30μg) or scopolamine (SCOP: 3 or 66.7μg) immediately prior to the conditioned reinforcement test. During the test, nosepoking into the active (conditioned reinforced, CR) noseport produced a lever cue while nosepoking on the inactive (non-conditioned reinforced, NCR) noseport had no consequence. AP-5 robustly attenuated conditioned reinforcement and blocked discrimination between CR and NCR noseports at the 1-μg dose. MEC infusion decreased responding for both CR and NCR while 66.7-μg SCOP disrupted the subject's ability to discriminate between CR and NCR. Together, our data suggest that VTA NMDARs and mAChRs, but not nAChRs, play a role in the ability of natural reward-associated cues to act as conditioned reinforcers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.