ArticleeLife2025
Cortico-striatal action control inherent of opponent cognitive-motivational styles.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Turning on cue or stopping at a red light requires attending to such cues to select action sequences, or suppress action, in accordance with learned cue-associated action rules. Cortico-striatal projections are an essential part of the brain's attention-motor interface. Glutamate-sensing microelectrode arrays were used to measure glutamate transients in the dorsomedial striatum (DMS) of male and female rats walking a treadmill and executing cued turns and stops. Prelimbic-DMS projections were chemogenetically inhibited to determine their behavioral necessity and the cortico-striatal origin of cue-evoked glutamate transients. Furthermore, we investigated rats exhibiting preferably goal-directed (goal trackers, GTs) versus cue-driven attention (sign-trackers, STs), to determine the impact of such cognitive-motivational biases on cortico-striatal control. GTs executed more cued turns and initiated such turns more slowly than STs. During turns, but not missed turns or cued stops, cue-evoked glutamate concentrations were higher in GTs than in STs. In STs, turn cue-locked glutamate concentrations frequently peaked twice or three times, contrasting with predominately single peaks in GTs. In GTs, but not STs, inhibition of prelimbic-DMS projections attenuated turn rates and turn cue-evoked glutamate concentrations and increased the number of turn cue-locked glutamate peaks. These findings indicate that turn cue-evoked glutamate release in GTs is tightly controlled by cortico-striatal neuronal activity. In contrast, in STs, glutamate release from DMS glutamatergic terminals may be regulated by other striatal circuitry, preferably mediating cued suppression of action and reward tracking. As cortico-striatal dysfunction has been hypothesized to contribute to a wide range of disorders, including complex movement control deficits in Parkinson's disease and compulsive drug taking, the demonstration of phenotypic contrasts in cortico-striatal control implies the presence of individual vulnerabilities for such disorders.
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.