English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

While recently completing a study of the effects of stimulating the lateral preoptic area (LPO) and ventral pallidum (VP) on locomotion and other movements, we also noticed LPO and VP effects on motivational drive and threat tolerance. Here, we have investigated these latter effects by testing conditioned place preference (CPP), behavior on the elevated plus maze (EPM) and the willingness of sated rats to occupy a harshly lit open field center to acquire sweet pellets, a measure of threat tolerance, following infusions of vehicle or bicuculline (bic) into the LPO and VP. LPO-bic infusions robustly increased total locomotion, and, in direct proportion, occupancy of both the harshly lit field center and open arms of the EPM. LPO bic also generated CPP, but did not increase sweet pellet ingestion. These effects were attenuated by dopamine D1 and D2 receptor antagonists, whether given individually or as a cocktail and systemically or infused bilaterally into the nucleus accumbens. VP-bic infusions did not increase total locomotion, but preferentially increased field center occupancy. VP-bic-infused rats compulsively ingested sweet pellets and did so even under the spotlight, whereas harsh illumination suppressed pellet ingestion in the control groups. VP bic produced CPP and increased open arm occupancy on the EPM. These effects were attenuated by pretreatment with dopamine receptor antagonists given systemically or as bilateral infusions into the VP, except for % distance in the field center (by D1 or D2 antagonists) and pellet ingestion (by D1 antagonist). Thus, boldness generated in association with LPO activation is tightly tied to locomotor activation and, as is locomotion itself, strongly DA dependent, whereas that accompanying stimulation of the VP is independent of locomotor activation and, at least in part, DA signaling. Furthermore, respective emboldened behaviors elicited from neither LPO nor VP could clearly be attributed to goal pursuit. Rather, emboldening of behavior seems more to be a fixed action response not fundamentally different than previously for reported locomotion, pivoting, backing, gnawing, and eating elicited by basal forebrain stimulation.

The lateral preoptic area and ventral pallidum embolden behavior