The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What and when to "want"? Amygdala-based focusing of incentive salience upon sugar and sex
Open accessAbstract
Rationale Amygdala-related circuitry helps translate learned Pavlovian associations into appetitive and aversive motivation, especially upon subsequent encounters with cues. Objectives We asked whether μ-opioid stimulation via microinjections of the specific agonist D-Ala(2), N-MePhe(4), Gly-ol)-enkephalin (DAMGO) in central nucleus of amygdala (CeA), or the adjacent basolateral amygdala (BLA) would magnify sucrose or sex "wanting", guided by available cues. Materials and methods CeA or BLA DAMGO enhancement of cue-triggered "wanting" was assessed using Pavlovian to instrumental transfer (PIT). Unconditioned food "wanting" was measured via intake, and male sexual "wanting" for an estrous female was measured in a sexual approach test. Sucrose hedonic taste "liking" was measured in a taste reactivity test. Results CeA (but not BLA) DAMGO increased the intensity of phasic peaks in instrumental sucrose seeking stimulated by Pavlovian cues over precue levels in PIT, while suppressing seeking at other moments. CeA DAMGO also enhanced food intake, as well as sexual approach and investigation of an estrous female by males. DAMGO "wanting" enhancements were localized to CeA, as indicated by "Fos plume"-based anatomical maps for DAMGO causation of behavioral effects. Despite increasing "wanting", CeA DAMGO decreased the hedonic impact or "liking" for sucrose in a taste reactivity paradigm. Conclusions CeA μ-opioid stimulation specifically enhances incentive salience, which is dynamically guided to food or sex by available cues.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Evidence suggests that repeated excitation by sexual stimuli can have a similar effect (Lynch and Ryan, 2020;Mahler and Berridge, 2012).”
From A motivation model of sex addiction – Relevance to the controversy over the concept (2022) · cites this paper as Mahler and Berridge, 2012
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The rat brain in stereotaxic coordinates
Palkovits, M. (1983) · Neuropeptides · doi:10.1016/0143-4179(83)90049-5 · Cited by 28,959
The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates
Paxinos, G., & Watson, C. (1983) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-63235-9 · Cited by 28,585
LeDoux, J. E. (2000) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.155 · Cited by 8,444
The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction
Robinson, T. (1993) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/0165-0173(93)90013-p · Cited by 7,346
AChE-stained horizontal sections of the rat brain in stereotaxic coordinates
Paxinos, G., WATSON, C. R. R., & Emson, P. C. (1980) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/0165-0270(80)90021-7 · Cited by 4,514
What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience?
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(98)00019-8 · Cited by 4,127
Self-citationIntegrative activity of the brain
Konorski, J. (1967) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · Cited by 2,043
The taste reactivity test. I. Mimetic responses to gustatory stimuli in neurologically normal rats
Grill, H. J., & Norgren, R. (1978) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(78)90568-1 · Cited by 1,220
A selective role for dopamine in stimulus-reward learning
Flagel, S. B., Clark, J. J., Robinson, T. E., Mayo, L., Czuj, A., Willuhn, I., Akers, C. A., Clinton, S. M., Phillips, P. E. M., & Akil, H. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09588 · Cited by 1,026
The Amygdala: a functional analysis
Aggleton, J. P. (2000) · Cited by 966
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Difeliceantonio AG, Berridge KC (2010) Neostriatal sites of mu opioid stimulation enhance CS motivational magnets. Society for Neuroscience, San Diego, CA
- Peciña S, Berridge KC (2008) Incentive salience mediation by opioid versus dopamine in nucleus accumbens shell and core: amplified cue-triggered ‘wanting’ for reward Society for Neuroscience. Society for Neuroscience, Washington, DC
- Toates F (1986) Motivational Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Berridge, K. C., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2015) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.02.018 · Cited by 1,730
Self-citationFrom prediction error to incentive salience: mesolimbic computation of reward motivation.
Berridge, K. C. (2012) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.07990.x · Cited by 700
Self-citationNeuroscience of affect: brain mechanisms of pleasure and displeasure
Berridge, K. C., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2013) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2013.01.017 · Cited by 532
Self-citationCastro, D. C., & Berridge, K. C. (2014) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4458-13.2014 · Cited by 395
Self-citationModel-based and model-free Pavlovian reward learning: Revaluation, revision, and revelation
Dayan, P., & Berridge, K. C. (2014) · Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-014-0277-8 · Cited by 357
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Mahler, S. V., & Berridge, K. C.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Mahler, Stephen V.
- Venue
- Psychopharmacology
- Published
- 2011-12-14
- Volume
- 221
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 407-426
- ISSN
- 0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-2072
- PMC
- PMC3444284
- OpenAlex
- W2147423572
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 103
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 3.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (1s15mh053649-01)
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH053649, R01MH063649)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA021481, DA015188, R01DA015188, F31DA021481)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- central amygdala, basolateral amygdala, mu-opioid receptor, DAMGO, incentive salience, sexual motivation, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer, sucrose seeking, dietary intake
- MeSH terms
- Amygdala, Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Cues, Eating, Estrus, Female, Male, Sexual Behavior, Animal, Sucrose, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Receptors, Opioid, mu, Enkephalin, Ala(2)-MePhe(4)-Gly(5)-, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
