New commentary on "Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 signaling and appetitive Pavlovian behavior: implications for the treatment of addiction"

Check out Jocelyn’s commentary on recent work in Neuropsychopharmacology from Nadia Chaudhri’s lab (“Context and topography determine the role of basolateral amygdala metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 in appetitive Pavlovian responding”). Khoo et al. investigated the role of type 5 metabotropic glutamate receptors in Pavlovian conditioned behavior, systemically (throughout the brain) and locally in the basolateral amygdala and nucleus accumbens. Jocelyn discusses their results and the implications they have for the treatment of addiction. The original article can be found at this link and Jocelyn’s commentary can be found here.

Jocelyn Richard
Jocelyn speaks at the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology meeting

Jocelyn attended the 2018 meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP) in Hollywood, Florida. She spoke in a panel on ventral pallidal roles in reward, decision-making and addiction entitled, “Should I Stay or Should I go to the Ventral Pallidum”. The session was chaired by Peter Kalivas and included fascinating talks from Drs. Meaghan Creed, Steve Mahler and Jasper Heinsbroek. Jocelyn spoke about ventral pallidal encoding of cue value and how alcohol exposure and associative learning with alcohol alters ventral pallidal responses to distinct types of cues (discriminative stimuli versus conditioned stimuli). The panel was a great reminder of all the exciting research happening on the ventral pallidum right now. But we really are just beginning - there remain many important questions about how this heterogeneous structure regulates diverse reward-related functions!

Jocelyn Richard
Check out our new work in eLife now!

Our new paper on ventral pallidal encoding of Pavlovian versus instrumental reward seeking is out now here

elife header.png

We investigated whether rat VP cue responses would encode and contribute similarly to the vigor of reward-seeking behaviors trained under Pavlovian versus instrumental contingencies, when these behavioral responses consist of superficially similar locomotor response patterns but may reflect distinct underlying decision-making processes. We find that cue-elicited activity in many VP neurons predicts the latency of instrumental reward seeking, but not of Pavlovian response latency. Further, disruption of VP signaling increases the latency of instrumental but not Pavlovian reward seeking. This suggests that VP encoding of and contributions to response vigor are specific to the ability of incentive cues to invigorate reward-seeking behaviors upon which reward delivery is contingent.

Jocelyn Richard