The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dopamine neurons of the monkey midbrain: contingencies of responses to stimuli eliciting immediate behavioral reactions
Abstract
1. This study investigates the behavioral conditions in which dopamine (DA) neurons of substantia nigra and adjoining areas A8 and A10 respond with impulses to visual and auditory trigger stimuli eliciting immediate arm- and eye-movement reactions. 2. In a formal task, the rapid opening of the door of a small, food-containing box located at eye level ahead of the animal served as visible and audible trigger stimulus. Most DA neurons on the contralateral side responded to this stimulus with a short burst of impulses with median onset latency of 50 ms and duration of 90 ms (75% of 164 neurons). Similar responses were seen in a comparable fraction of DA neurons during ipsilateral task performance, suggesting that responses were not specific for the limb being used. 3. When the sensory components of the door opening stimulus were separated, DA neurons typically responded in a similar manner to the moving visual stimulus of the opening door, the low-intensity sliding noise of the opening door, and the 1-kHz sound of 90-92 dB intensity emitted from a distant source at the onset of door opening. Responses to each component alone were lower in magnitude than to all three together. 4. In a variation of the task, a neighboring, identical food box opened in random alternation with the other box but without permitting animals to reach out (asymmetric, direct-reaction go/no-go task). With each sensory component, DA neurons typically responded both to opening of go and no-go boxes. Responses were enhanced when stimuli elicited limb movements in go trials. 5. Monkeys reacted to door opening with target-directed saccadic eye movements in the majority of both go and no-go trials. Neuronal responses were equally present during the occasional absence of eye movements. Thus responses were not specific for the initiation of individual arm or eye movements. 6. Neuronal responses were absent when the same stimuli occurred outside of the behavioral task with target-direct arm and eye movements lacking. This shows that responses were not of purely sensory nature but were related to the capacity of the stimulus for eliciting behavioral reactions. 7. In a variation of the go/no-go task, an instruction light illuminated 2-3 s before door opening prepared the animal to perform the reaching movement on door opening or to refrain from moving (asymmetric, instruction-dependent go/no-go task).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“various subsets of dopamine neurons (1–44%) show slow, sluggish and diverse changes in the seconds time range that are inconsistently related to various aspects of behavioural task engagement and reactivity with stimulus-triggered or self-initiated arm or mouth movements11,12,14,18”
From Dopamine reward prediction-error signalling: A two-component response (2016) · cites this paper as [18]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A neural substrate of prediction and reward
Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 · Cited by 9,388
Self-citationThe 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
Predictive reward signal of dopamine neurons
Schultz, W. (1998) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1998.80.1.1 · Cited by 4,564
“…: response to an instruction cue pre- but closely resemble reward-predicting stimuli, despite corceding the reward-predicting trigger stimulus by a fixed interval of 1 s in rect behavioral discrimination (Schultz and Romo 1990).an instructed spatial reaching task (19 neurons) (Schultz et al. 1993).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationGetting formal with dopamine and reward
Schultz, W. (2002) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00967-4 · Cited by 2,574
“…only to the onset of conditioned stimuli and not to their offset, even if stimuli are used whose offsets,Pavlovian or instrumental tasks, such as visual or audi- tory reaction time tasks, spatial delayed response or rather than their onsets, are valid predictors of reward (Schultz and Romo, 1990).”
Self-citationTHE BASAL GANGLIA: FOCUSED SELECTION AND INHIBITION OF COMPETING MOTOR PROGRAMS
Mink, J. W. (1996) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/s0301-0082(96)00042-1 · Cited by 2,478
Metadata
- Authors
- Schultz, W., & Romo, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Fribourg (CH)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 1990-03-01
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 607-624
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- OpenAlex
- W2402721223
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 3.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Keywords
- dopaminergic neurons, substantia nigra, midbrain, go/no-go task, saccades, arm movement
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Action Potentials, Animals, Arm, Dopamine, Eye Movements, Functional Laterality, Macaca, Macaca fascicularis, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Substantia Nigra, Visual Pathways
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