Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Mediates Effort-related Responding in Rats

Münster, Alexandra; Hauber, Wolfgang

doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx293

Cited by 28 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, other findings in the Münster & Hauber (2017) complicate this interpretation, and do not agree with the results of our study for the medial orbital cortex. Münster & Hauber (2017) also examined effects of pharmacological inactivation (muscimol and baclofen) and excitation (picrotoxin) in the medial orbital cortex. The studies used rats with just 3 days of training prior to the pharmacological testing.…”

Section: Effects On Breakpointscontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…A subsequent study by Gourley et al (2016) used a chemogenetic method and other molecular tools that stimulated the medial orbital region and found reductions in breakpoints in task naive animals. A similar finding was reported by Münster & Hauber (2017) for rats that received medial orbital lesions prior to training (their experiment 1). The implications of the studies are that medial frontal areas do not control breakpoint in experienced animals, but are crucial for learning to perform the procedure.…”

Section: Effects On Breakpointssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…The rats had experience in an operant choice task, which failed to find effects of medial orbital inactivation, and then were trained over 2 sessions to lever press and then to perform a progressive ratio design over 4 additional sessions. The range of breakpoints was low in this study (<20) in comparison to the lever-press studies in rats by Schweimer & Hauber (2005) and Münster & Hauber (2017).…”

Section: Effects On Breakpointscontrasting

confidence: 78%

“…A major difference between our study and the one by Münster & Hauber (2017) was the extent of training prior to reversible inactivation. Münster & Hauber (2017) trained rats for 3 sessions prior to pharmacological testing. By contrast, the rats in our study were trained for many more sessions (median of 14 sessions; range 3 to 35).…”

Section: Effects On Breakpointsmentioning

confidence: 61%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The rat medial frontal cortex controls pace, but not breakpoint, in a progressive ratio licking task.

Swanson¹,

Goldbach²,

Laubach³

2019

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MEDIAL FRONTAL CORTEX AND PROGRESSIVE RATIO PERFORMANCE 2 AbstractThe medial frontal cortex (MFC) is crucial for selecting actions and evaluating their outcomes.Outcome monitoring may be triggered by rostral parts of the MFC, which contain neurons that are modulated by reward consumption and are necessary for the expression of relative reward value. Here, we examined if the MFC further has a role in the control of instrumental licking.We used a progressive ratio licking task in which rats had to make increasing numbers of licks to receive liquid sucrose rewards. We determined what measures of progressive ratio performance are sensitive to value by testing rats with rewards containing 0-16% sucrose. We found some measures (breakpoint, number of licking bouts) were sensitive to sucrose concentration and others (response rate, duration of licking bouts) were not. Then, we examined the effects of reversibly inactivating rostral (medial orbital) and caudal (prelimbic) parts of the MFC. We were surprised to find that inactivation had no effects on measures associated with value (e.g. breakpoint). Instead, inactivation altered behavioral measures associated with the pace of task performance (response rate and time to break). These effects depended on where inactivations were made. Response rates increased and time to break decreased when the caudal prelimbic area was inactivated. By contrast, response rates decreased and the time to break increased when the rostral medial orbital cortex was inactivated. Our findings suggest that the medial frontal cortex has a role in maintaining task engagement, but not in the motivational control of action, in the progressive ratio licking task.Inhibition is a classic interpretation of orbitofrontal function (Dias et al., 1996).However, more recent studies have emphasized a role for the medial orbital areas in predictions and evaluations of behavioral outcomes (Rudebeck & Murray, 2014;Rudebeck et al., 2017) and inferences based on learned associations between actions and outcomes (Bradfield et al., 2015).As such, disruptions of medial orbital control should reduce, not increase, breakpoints, as is also 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 cues signaling reward delivery, and the method, spatial extent, and cell type affected by the brain perturbations (lesion, muscimol, chemogenetics, optogenetics). Our findings on breakpoint are similar to three published studies. Kheramin et al. (2005), Schweimer & Hauber (2005), and Gourley et al. (2010) found no effects of lesions in three different cortical areas, two different actions, two different species, and very different levels of training. The Kheramin study used rats, required lever pressing, and lesioned the ventral orbital area after 60 training sessions. The Schweimer study also used rats, required lever pressing, and lesioned the perigenual prelimbic and cingulate after 6 training sessions. The Gourley study used

show abstract

Section: Effects On Breakpointscontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Effects On Breakpointssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Effects On Breakpointscontrasting

confidence: 78%

Section: Effects On Breakpointsmentioning

confidence: 61%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The rat medial frontal cortex controls pace, but not breakpoint, in a progressive ratio licking task.

Swanson¹,

Goldbach²,

Laubach³

2019

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it is also possible that posterior mOFC may not contribute to the inference of appetitive outcomes, but does contribute to punishment sensitivity. In fact, if this were the case it would be consistent with several findings (Gourley et al 2010;Münster and Hauber 2018) in which inactivation of [posterior] mOFC produces more persistent lever-press responding than in controls, and a higher 'break point' at which animals stop responding for progressively more sparse outcomes. This ever-increasing scarcity of outcomes could be interpreted as a 'punishment' of lever presses in this task, and insensitivity to this punishment as a result of posterior mOFC inactivation may have contributed to the observed increase in breakpoint.…”

Section: Conditioned Suppression During Conditioned Punishment Re-trasupporting

confidence: 89%

Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Regulates Instrumental Conditioned Punishment, but not Pavlovian Conditioned Fear

Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel

Roughley

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bidirectionally aberrant medial orbitofrontal cortical (mOFC) activity has been consistently linked with compulsion and compulsive disorders. Although rodent studies have established a causal link between mOFC excitation and compulsive-like actions, no such link has been made with mOFC inhibition. Here we use excitotoxic lesions of mOFC to investigate its role in sensitivity to punishment; a core characteristic of many compulsive disorders. In our first experiment, we demonstrated that mOFC lesions prevented instrumental conditioned punishment learning in a manner that could not be attributed to differences in Pavlovian conditioned fear. We then showed that increasing the frequency of punishing outcomes allowed mOFC-lesioned animals to overcome their initial deficit. Our second experiment demonstrated that the retrieval of instrumental punishment is also mOFC-dependent, as mOFC lesions prevented the extended retrieval of punishment contingencies relative to shams. In contrast, mOFC lesions did not prevent the re-acquisition of conditioned punishment that was learned prior to lesions being administered. Together, these results reveal that the mOFC does indeed regulate punishment learning and retrieval in a manner that is disassociated from any role in Pavlovian fear learning. These results imply that aberrant mOFC activity may contribute to the punishment insensitivity that is observed across multiple compulsive disorders.

show abstract

Involvement of the rodent prelimbic and medial orbitofrontal cortices in goal‐directed action: A brief review

Woon

Sequeira

Barbee

et al. 2019

J of Neuroscience Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goal‐directed action refers to selecting behaviors based on the expectation that they will be reinforced with desirable outcomes. It is typically conceptualized as opposing habit‐based behaviors, which are instead supported by stimulus–response associations and insensitive to consequences. The prelimbic prefrontal cortex (PL) is positioned along the medial wall of the rodent prefrontal cortex. It is indispensable for action–outcome‐driven (goal‐directed) behavior, consolidating action–outcome relationships and linking contextual information with instrumental behavior. In this brief review, we will discuss the growing list of molecular factors involved in PL function. Ventral to the PL is the medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC). We will also summarize emerging evidence from rodents (complementing existing literature describing humans) that it too is involved in action–outcome conditioning. We describe experiments using procedures that quantify responding based on reward value, the likelihood of reinforcement, or effort requirements, touching also on experiments assessing food consumption more generally. We synthesize these findings with the argument that the mOFC is essential to goal‐directed action when outcome value information is not immediately observable and must be recalled and inferred.

show abstract

Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Mediates Effort-related Responding in Rats

Cited by 28 publications

References 43 publications

The rat medial frontal cortex controls pace, but not breakpoint, in a progressive ratio licking task.

The rat medial frontal cortex controls pace, but not breakpoint, in a progressive ratio licking task.

Medial Orbitofrontal Cortex Regulates Instrumental Conditioned Punishment, but not Pavlovian Conditioned Fear

Involvement of the rodent prelimbic and medial orbitofrontal cortices in goal‐directed action: A brief review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About