Cited by 357Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Optogenetic interrogation of dopaminergic modulation of the multiple phases of reward-seeking behavior

Open access
Adamantidis, A. R., Tsai, H.-C., Boutrel, B., Zhang, F., Stuber, G. D., Budygin, E. A., Tourino, C., Bonci, A. +2 more·2011·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Phasic activation of dopaminergic neurons is associated with reward-predicting cues and supports learning during behavioral adaptation. While noncontingent activation of dopaminergic neurons in the ventral tegmental are (VTA) is sufficient for passive behavioral conditioning, it remains unknown whether the phasic dopaminergic signal is truly reinforcing. In this study, we first targeted the expression of channelrhodopsin-2 to dopaminergic neurons of the VTA and optimized optogenetically evoked dopamine transients. Second, we showed that phasic activation of dopaminergic neurons in freely moving mice causally enhances positive reinforcing actions in a food-seeking operant task. Interestingly, such effect was not found in the absence of food reward. We further found that phasic activation of dopaminergic neurons is sufficient to reactivate previously extinguished food-seeking behavior in the absence of external cues. This was also confirmed using a single-session reversal paradigm. Collectively, these data suggest that activation of dopaminergic neurons facilitates the development of positive reinforcement during reward-seeking and behavioral flexibility.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.2246-11.2011

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 dopamine system may be a therapeutic target for stress-induced reversal learning deficits.

    “Dopamine is required for several reward-associated learning processes; therefore, the dopamine system may represent a potential point of therapeutic intervention for reversal learning deficits caused by stress (Adamantidis et al 2011, Rossi et al 2013, Schultz 2013).”

    From Prefrontal cortex executive processes affected by stress in health and disease (2018) · cites this paper as Adamantidis et al 2011

  • Dopamine is required for several reward-associated learning processes.

    “Dopamine is required for several reward-associated learning processes; therefore, the dopamine system may represent a potential point of therapeutic intervention for reversal learning deficits caused by stress (Adamantidis et al 2011, Rossi et al 2013, Schultz 2013).”

    From Prefrontal cortex executive processes affected by stress in health and disease (2018) · cites this paper as Adamantidis et al 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 52 · Cited by 357

Authors
Adamantidis, A. R., Tsai, H.-C., Boutrel, B., Zhang, F., Stuber, G. D., Budygin, E. A., Tourino, C., Bonci, A., Deisseroth, K., & de Lecea, L.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CH)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Deisseroth, K.
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2011-07-27
Volume
31
Issue
30
Pages
10829-10835
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2165706889
Cited by
357
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 27
FWCI
12.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • McKnight Foundation
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • Fonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH87592, MH83702, R01MH083702, R01MH087592)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA021880, DA21880)
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 › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
dopaminergic neurons, ventral tegmental area, phasic dopamine release, reward-seeking behavior, positive reinforcement, behavioral flexibility, extinction, reversal learning, channelrhodopsin-2, optogenetic stimulation
MeSH terms
Channelrhodopsins, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Bacterial Proteins, Conditioning, Operant, Discrimination, Psychological, Dopamine, Electric Stimulation, Gene Expression Regulation, Luminescent Proteins, Male, Mice, Transgenic, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Reward, Time Factors, Tyrosine 3-Monooxygenase, Ventral Tegmental Area, Mice, Electrochemical Techniques

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