Explore the vast range of titles available.

Impaired cognitive flexibility in visual reversal-learning tasks has been observed in a wide range of neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. Although both human and animal studies have implicated striatal D2-like and D1-like receptors (D2R; D1R) in this form of flexibility, less is known about the contribution they make within distinct sub-regions of the striatum and the different phases of visual reversal learning. The present study investigated the involvement of D2R and D1R during the early (perseverative) phase of reversal learning as well as in the intermediate and late stages (new learning) after microinfusions of D2R and D1R antagonists into the nucleus accumbens core and shell (NAcC; NAcS), the anterior and posterior dorsomedial striatum (DMS) and the dorsolateral striatum (DLS) on a touchscreen visual serial reversal-learning task. Reversal learning was improved after dopamine receptor blockade in the nucleus accumbens; the D1R antagonist, SCH23390, in the NAcS and the D2R antagonist, raclopride, in the NAcC selectively reduced early, perseverative errors. In contrast, reversal learning was impaired by D2R antagonism, but not D1R antagonism, in the dorsal striatum: raclopride increased errors in the intermediate phase after DMS infusions, and increased errors across phases after DLS infusions. These findings indicate that D1R and D2R modulate different stages of reversal learning through effects localised to different sub-regions of the striatum. Thus, deficits in behavioral flexibility observed in disorders linked to dopamine perturbations may be attributable to specific D1R and D2R dysfunction in distinct striatal sub-regions.

Addiction is regarded as a disorder of inflexible choice with behavior dominated by immediate positive rewards over longer-term negative outcomes. However, the psychological mechanisms underlying the effects of self-administered drugs on behavioral flexibility are not well understood. To investigate whether drug exposure causes asymmetric effects on positive and negative outcomes we used a reversal learning procedure to assess how reward contingencies are utilized to guide behavior in rats previously exposed to intravenous cocaine self-administration (SA). Twenty-four rats were screened for anxiety in an open field prior to acquisition of cocaine SA over six daily sessions with subsequent long-access cocaine SA for 7 days. Control rats (n = 24) were trained to lever-press for food under a yoked schedule of reinforcement. Higher rates of cocaine SA were predicted by increased anxiety and preceded impaired reversal learning, expressed by a decrease in lose-shift as opposed to win-stay probability. A model-free reinforcement learning algorithm revealed that rats with high, but not low cocaine escalation failed to exploit previous reward learning and were more likely to repeat the same response as the previous trial. Eight-day withdrawal from high cocaine escalation was associated, respectively, with increased and decreased dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) and serotonin receptor 2C (HTR2C) expression in the ventral striatum compared with controls. Dopamine receptor D1 (DRD1) expression was also significantly reduced in the orbitofrontal cortex of high cocaine-escalating rats. These findings indicate that withdrawal from escalated cocaine SA disrupts how negative feedback is used to guide goal-directed behavior for natural reinforcers and that trait anxiety may be a latent variable underlying this interaction.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

RationaleDopamine D2-like receptors (D2R) are important drug targets in schizophrenia and Parkinson’s disease, but D2R ligands also cause cognitive inflexibility such as poor reversal learning. The specific role of D2R in reversal learning remains unclear.ObjectivesWe tested the hypotheses that D2R agonism impairs reversal learning by blocking negative feedback and that antagonism of D1-like receptors (D1R) impairs learning from positive feedback.MethodsMale Lister Hooded rats were trained on a novel visual reversal learning task. Performance on “probe trials”, during which the correct or incorrect stimulus was presented with a third, probabilistically rewarded (50% of trials) and therefore intermediate stimulus, revealed individual learning curves for the processes of positive and negative feedback. The effects of D2R and D1R agonists and antagonists were evaluated. A separate cohort was tested on a spatial probabilistic reversal learning (PRL) task after D2R agonism. Computational reinforcement learning modelling was applied to choice data from the PRL task to evaluate the contribution of latent factors.ResultsD2R agonism with quinpirole dose-dependently impaired both visual reversal and PRL. Analysis of the probe trials on the visual task revealed a complete blockade of learning from negative feedback at the 0.25 mg/kg dose, while learning from positive feedback was intact. Estimated parameters from the model that best described the PRL choice data revealed a steep and selective decrease in learning rate from losses. D1R antagonism had a transient effect on the positive probe trials.ConclusionsD2R stimulation impairs reversal learning by blocking the impact of negative feedback.

Cognitive flexibility, the capacity to adapt behaviour to changes in the environment, is impaired in a range of brain disorders, including substance use disorder and Parkinson's disease. Putative neural substrates of cognitive flexibility include mesencephalic pathways to the ventral striatum (VS) and dorsomedial striatum (DMS), hypothesised to encode learning signals needed to maximize rewarded outcomes during decision-making. However, it is unclear whether mesencephalic projections to the ventral and dorsal striatum are distinct in their contribution to flexible reward-related learning. Here, rats acquired a two-choice spatial probabilistic reversal learning (PRL) task, reinforced on an 80%:20% basis, that assessed the flexibility of behaviour to repeated reversals of response-outcome contingencies. We report that optogenetic stimulation of projections from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) to the nucleus accumbens shell (NAcbS) in the VS significantly impaired reversal learning when optical stimulation was temporally aligned with negative feedback (i.e., reward omission). Moreover, the exploitation-exploration parameter, beta, was increased (indicating greater exploitation of information) when this pathway was optogenetically stimulated after a spurious loss (i.e. an incorrect (20%) response at the 80% reinforrced location) compared to after a spurious win (i.e. a correct (20%) response at the 20% reinforced location). VTA -> NAcbS stimulation during other phases of the behavioural task was without effect. Optogenetic stimulation of projection neurons from the substantia nigra (SN) to the DMS, aligned either with reward receipt or omission or prior to making a choice, had no effect on reversal learning. These findings are consistent with the notion that enhanced activity in VTA -> NAcbS projections leads to maladaptive perseveration as a consequence of an inappropriate bias to exploitation via positive reinforcement.Competing Interest StatementThis research was funded by an award from Boehringer Ingelheim to JWD and by a Wellcome Trust Senior Investigator grant 104631/Z/14/Z to TWR. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. All experiments were conducted at Boehringer Ingelheim, Germany. This work was also supported by the La Caixa Foundation, Spain, and a studentship from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH, Germany. KZ was funded by the Angharad Dodds John Bursary, Downing College, Cambridge. SP was funded by a student internship from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Germany. SD, WN, MvH and JRN are full-time employees at Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH, Germany. JWD has received funding from GlaxoSmithKline and editorial honoraria from the British Neuroscience Association and Springer Verlag. TWR is a consultant for Cambridge Cognition; had recent research grants with Shionogi and GlaxoSmithKline and receives editorial honoraria from Springer Nature and Elsevier. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.