ArticlePloS one2020
Dopamine neurons do not constitute an obligatory stage in the final common path for the evaluation and pursuit of brain stimulation reward.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- A dopamine mechanism for reward maximization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Optical Intracranial Self-Stimulation (oICSS): A New Behavioral Model for Studying Drug Reward and Aversion in Rodents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Mesolimbic dopamine release conveys causal associations.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Enhanced perceptual task performance without deprivation in mice using medial forebrain bundle stimulation.Cell reports methods · 2022Article
- Dopamine and Beyond: Implications of Psychophysical Studies of Intracranial Self-Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- On the Similarity Between the Reinforcing and the Discriminative Properties of Intracranial Self-Stimulation.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Convergence Model of Brain Reward Circuitry: Implications for Relief of Treatment-Resistant Depression by Deep-Brain Stimulation of the Medial Forebrain Bundle.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Editorial: Neurobehavioral Mechanisms of Reward: Theoretical and Technical Perspectives and Their Implications for Psychopathology.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- Introducing the PLOS ONE Collection on the neuroscience of reward and decision making.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The neurobiological study of reward was launched by the discovery of intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS). Subsequent investigation of this phenomenon provided the initial link between reward-seeking behavior and dopaminergic neurotransmission. We re-evaluated this relationship by psychophysical, pharmacological, optogenetic, and computational means. In rats working for direct, optical activation of midbrain dopamine neurons, we varied the strength and opportunity cost of the stimulation and measured time allocation, the proportion of trial time devoted to reward pursuit. We found that the dependence of time allocation on the strength and cost of stimulation was similar formally to that observed when electrical stimulation of the medial forebrain bundle served as the reward. When the stimulation is strong and cheap, the rats devote almost all their time to reward pursuit; time allocation falls off as stimulation strength is decreased and/or its opportunity cost is increased. A 3D plot of time allocation versus stimulation strength and cost produces a surface resembling the corner of a plateau (the "reward mountain"). We show that dopamine-transporter blockade shifts the mountain along both the strength and cost axes in rats working for optical activation of midbrain dopamine neurons. In contrast, the same drug shifted the mountain uniquely along the opportunity-cost axis when rats worked for electrical MFB stimulation in a prior study. Dopamine neurons are an obligatory stage in the dominant model of ICSS, which positions them at a key nexus in the final common path for reward seeking. This model fails to provide a cogent account for the differential effect of dopamine transporter blockade on the reward mountain. Instead, we propose that midbrain dopamine neurons and neurons with non-dopaminergic, MFB axons constitute parallel limbs of brain-reward circuitry that ultimately converge on the final-common path for the evaluation and pursuit of rewards.
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.