The Journal of Neuroscience, April 5, 2006, 26(14):3791-3797; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0390-06.2006
Previous Article | Next Article 
Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
Different Roles for Amygdala Central Nucleus and Substantia Innominata in the Surprise-Induced Enhancement of Learning
Peter C. Holland and
Michela Gallagher
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Peter C. Holland, Johns Hopkins University, 222 Ames Hall, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218. Email: pch{at}jhu.edu
Within most modern learning theories, the discrepancy between expected and obtained outcomes ("prediction error" or "surprise") is a critical determinant of the acquisition of learned associations. The results of studies from many laboratories show that the surprising omission of an expected event may enhance attention to stimuli that remain present, such that subsequent learning about those stimuli is enhanced. A series of reports from our laboratories demonstrated that these surprise-induced enhancements of stimulus associability depend on circuitry that includes the amygdala central nucleus (CeA), the cholinergic neurons in the sublenticular substantia innominata/nucleus basalis magnocellularis (SI/nBM), as well as certain cortical projections of these latter neurons. In this study, we found very different roles for CeA and SI/nBM in surprise-induced enhancements of stimulus associability. In four experiments that used transient inactivation techniques, we found that surprise-induced enhancement of subsequent learning about a stimulus depended on intact CeA function at the time of surprise but not when more rapid learning was subsequently expressed. In contrast, normal SI/nBM function was critical to the expression of enhanced learning but was not necessary when surprise was induced. These data suggest that these two components of the so-called "extended amygdala" serve distinct roles in the encoding and retrieval of information used in modulating attention to stimuli in associative learning. Additional circuitry linking these brain regions may also be important in the maintenance of that information.
Key words: amygdala central nucleus; attention; conditioning; prediction error; substantia innominata; transient inactivation; rat
Received Jan. 27, 2006;
revised Feb. 21, 2006;
accepted Feb. 23, 2006.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Peter C. Holland, Johns Hopkins University, 222 Ames Hall, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218. Email: pch{at}jhu.edu
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Knapska, K. Radwanska, T. Werka, and L. Kaczmarek
Functional Internal Complexity of Amygdala: Focus on Gene Activity Mapping After Behavioral Training and Drugs of Abuse
Physiol Rev,
October 1, 2007;
87(4):
1113 - 1173.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Schaefer, T. S. Braver, J. R. Reynolds, G. C. Burgess, T. Yarkoni, and J. R. Gray
Individual Differences in Amygdala Activity Predict Response Speed during Working Memory
J. Neurosci.,
October 4, 2006;
26(40):
10120 - 10128.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. J. Lee, J. M. Youn, M. J. O, M. Gallagher, and P. C. Holland
Role of substantia nigra-amygdala connections in surprise-induced enhancement of attention.
J. Neurosci.,
May 31, 2006;
26(22):
6077 - 6081.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|