ArticleeLife2025
The influence of nucleus accumbens shell D1 and D2 neurons on outcome-specific Pavlovian instrumental transfer.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identity-specific reward expectations in orbitofrontal cortex guide goal-directed choices.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The nucleus accumbens shell (NAc-S) and its projections to the ventral pallidum (VP) are thought to be critical for stimulus-based decisions. The NAc-S is predominantly composed of spiny projection neurons (SPNs) that express either the dopamine D1 (D1-SPNs) or the dopamine D2 receptor (D2-SPNs). Yet, the role of these two neuronal subpopulations and their inputs to the VP in stimulus-based decisions remains unknown. Here, we used optogenetics in female and male knock-in rats to selectively silence D1- or D2-SPNs and their projections to the VP at a time when the rats were required to use predictive stimuli to choose between two instrumental actions. Silencing either population of NAc-S SPNs disrupted choice. Silencing NAc-S D1-SPNs terminals in the VP also disrupted choice. However, choice was left intact by silencing NAc-S D2-SPNs terminals in the VP. Together, these findings provide novel insights into the cellular mechanisms and circuitry underlying stimulus-based decisions. We discuss how these insights are consistent with a recent model proposing that these decisions are controlled by an opioid-based memory system residing in the NAc-S.
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.