Approach‐avoidance analysis of rat diencephalon

Abstract

Behavioral reinforcement by stimulation of diencephalic structures is by now well established. Delgado, Roberts, and Miller ('54), after the work of Hess ('54), Gastaut et al. ( ' 5 2 ) , Kaada, ('51), and Masserman ('41, ' 4 2 ) , established negative reinforcement to diencephalic stimulation in the region of the ventral posterior thalamic nuclei. Work of our own (Olds and Milner, '54; Olds, '56, '60) has established positive reinforcement on stimulation in a system based in medial forebrain bundle regions of the lateral hypothalamus and also in the other brain regions tied together by the widely distributed medial forebrain bundle.Roberts ('58a, b), Brown and Cohen ('59), and Bower and Miller ('58) have indicated some regions where both approach and avoidance are evoked by stimulation of the same point. Brodie et al. ('60) have shown, to the contrary, that some points yielding positive reinforcement in medial forebrain bundle regions of the macaque could not be made to yield any escape or avoidance reactions at all. Lilly ('58) has reported a focal point near the anterior commissure of the macaque where approach was produced by very low stimulation levels, and a point much lower (near the optic chiasma) where escape was produced by very low stimulation levels. In the rat, we ('60) have found points in medial forebrain bundle regions where stimulation produced positive reinforcement only, points in dorsomedial tegmentum where stimulation produced negative reinforcement only, and points in between these two types, where stimulation produced both positive and negative reinforcement.Questions remain unanswered concerning the pervasiveness of the areas of pure positive reinforcement, of pure negative reinforcement, and of overlap. More specifically, the questions are concerned with which areas are involved in each phenomenon. The present study takes up these questions with respect to diencephalic centers and some bordering regions of midbrain and telencephalon in the rat. MATERIALS AND METHODS Subjects.One electrode pair was implanted in each of 123 male albino rats.(As explained later in the paper, only 96 of the pairs could be tested for both approach and avoidance behavior.) The electrodes were bipolar, twisted silver wires, 0.01 inch in diameter and insulated except for the cross section of the tips. The two tips were separated only by their insulation; since the distance between electrodes was only about 0.003 inches, the pair could be thought of as stimulating at a single point. Each pair was held in a plastic block screwed to the skull, permitting firm attachment of the light lead wires from the stimulator. The placement of the stimulating tips of the pairs was varied 1 mm from rat to rat in order to form a loose grid of diencephalon and related structures.A straight line passing from the primary skull marking, bregma, and through the anterior commissure and optic chiasma was used for reference. Points were denoted by ( 1 ) their anterior or posterior distance from this line, ( 2 ) their lateral distance...

Dynamic changes in accumbens dopamine correlate with learning during intracranial self-stimulation

“…In this paradigm, a rat depresses a lever to deliver an electric shock to electrodes implanted within the brain. Extensive mapping studies by Olds and Olds later showed that the neuroanatomical region supporting ICSS centered in the posterior MFB region of the lateral hypothalamus (2). This finding provoked considerable interest, because it identified a brain reward pathway that could be centrally activated without the need for sensory stimulation (3,4).…”

Neuroethics of Deep Brain Stimulation for Mental Disorders: Brain Stimulation Reward in Humans

“…The lateral hypothalamus is the area in which BSR is consistently induced in rats. 3,33,34) The locus coeruleus complex is also one of the areas associated with BSR in rats. 4,16,46,47) The above-mentioned experience suggests that DBS in the proximity of these areas could induce BSR unexpectedly, in which patients would be``addicted to the stimulation itself'' or``compulsive about the stimula-Neuroethics and BSR tion,'' and stimulate themselves``for the entire day'' and``at maximum amplitude.'…”

“…Similar studies were performed by Sidman et al in 1955, 45) and by others. Subsequent research 2,18,30,31,33,34,44) revealed that stimulation of a broad range of areas, including the lateral hypothalamus, could be rewarding to rats. Such areas were termed the``reward system.''…”

Intracranial stimulation: Performance decrements and a fear-reducing drug

“…Rats that were stimulated in the medial forebrain bundle showed little or no decrements, while decrements were shown by rats whose stimulation sites were somewhat removed from the medial forebrain bundle. Those sites associated with decrements were in regions Olds & Olds (1963) have shown to be both positively and negatively reinforcing, depending on rather slight changes in parameters of stimulation. These data, plus other observations, such as the decrement frequently becoming apparent after some training rather than throughout training, led to the speculation that the performance decrement is analogous to behavior seen in studies of approach-avoidance conflict.…”