Cited by 66Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurological disorders and treatments

Dopamine action in the nucleus accumbens

DeFrance, J. F., Sikes, R. W., Chronister, R. B.·1985·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

The action of dopamine was studied in the nucleus accumbens of acutely prepared rabbits. Dopamine was applied iontophoretically to those cells and cell populations that responded in a monosynaptic excitatory manner to ipsilateral fimbrial stimulation. This strategy was adopted to isolate the effects of dopamine on postsynaptic receptors thus avoiding the bias resulting from activation of presynaptic dopamine receptors on dopaminergic afferents. Dopamine was found to have a suppressive effect on the excitatory (N) component of the field response and on driven extracellular unitary discharges. The specificity of dopamine's effect with receptors was indicated by the facts that fluphenazine effectively antagonized dopamine's effect, whereas bicuculline did not. The effect of dopamine was dependent on the rate of fimbrial stimulation. Dopamine has a marked suppressive effect on the fimbria-induced response at 0.5 Hz of stimulation but not at 6.0 Hz. This frequency specificity could not be linked directly to a cyclic adenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (cyclic AMP) mechanism because the iontophoresis cyclic AMP and dibutyryl cyclic AMP had suppressive effects at both 0.5 and 6.0 Hz rates of stimulation. It is suggested that dopamine acts in the nucleus accumbens to increase the "signal-to-noise" ratio. This might be a form of "contrast enhancement" of an incoming hippocampal message.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1985.54.6.1568

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DeFrance, J. F., Sikes, R. W., & Chronister, R. B.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1985-12-01
Volume
54
Issue
6
Pages
1568-1577
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2257076861
Cited by
66
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R0-1MH31114)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
dopamine, nucleus accumbens, postsynaptic dopamine receptors, signal-to-noise ratio, contrast enhancement, fluphenazine, bicuculline, cyclic AMP, frequency dependence, excitatory postsynaptic potentials
MeSH terms
Cyclic AMP, Animals, Bucladesine, Dopamine, Electric Stimulation, Evoked Potentials, Hippocampus, Iontophoresis, Male, Neurons, Nucleus Accumbens, Rabbits, Reaction Time, Septal Nuclei

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