Skip to main content

Umbrella menu

  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Preparing a Manuscript
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Fees
    • Journal Club
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Preparing a Manuscript
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Fees
    • Journal Club
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Articles, Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

Reduced Neuronal Inhibition and Coordination of Adolescent Prefrontal Cortex during Motivated Behavior

David A. Sturman and Bita Moghaddam
Journal of Neuroscience 26 January 2011, 31 (4) 1471-1478; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4210-10.2011
David A. Sturman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bita Moghaddam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Electrode placements, task paradigm, and behavioral performance. A, Adolescent and adult rats were trained on a simple instrumental learning paradigm in which they associated a nose poke (instrumental response) into a light-cued hole with the subsequent delivery of a food-pellet reinforcer (Sturman et al., 2010). Trials began with the onset of the light cue. Once cued, animals could poke into the lit hole, which turned off that light and led to the immediate delivery of a pellet into a food trough on the opposite side of the box. As soon as they poked into the food trough to retrieve the pellet, a 5 s intertrial interval (ITI) was triggered, followed by the next trial. Sessions were terminated after rats performed 100 trials or 30 min elapsed. Rats performed this task in six sessions on consecutive days. B, Electrode placement for rats included in the study. Electrodes were placed in the left or right OFC, corresponding to the lateral orbital and agranular insular cortices. Black dots represent the approximate location of lesions associated with electrode placements, overlaid on standard rat atlas images (Paxinos and Watson, 1998). Numbers represent distance (in millimeters) anterior to bregma for adult animals. C, No significant behavioral differences were observed between adolescents (n = 8) and adults (n = 4) in the initial learning or performance of this task, with comparable between-age-group total trials (top), latencies from trial-onset cue to the instrumental response (middle), and latencies from instrumental response to food-pellet retrieval (bottom).

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Adolescent and adult OFC LFPs during sessions 3–6. A, LFP power spectra for adolescents and adults in windows around key task events were normalized to the baseline period (3 to 1 s before cue onset) for each frequency. The time course of normalized LFP power was primarily similar between adolescents and adults. At cue onset, both groups exhibited slight reductions in gamma (>30 Hz) power. This was also observed around the instrumental response. Adults and adolescents both exhibited slightly increased beta (13–30 Hz) power at this time. Immediately after reinforcement, adolescents and adults had increases in theta (4–7 Hz), alpha (8–12 Hz), beta, and gamma power, with adults showing greater increases in the alpha and beta bands. Adolescents had greater increases in high gamma power (above ∼75 Hz). B, Time course of adolescent and adult normalized LFP power around reinforcement. Line graphs correspond to baseline-normalized adolescent and adult LFP power averaged across discrete frequency bands as labeled.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Fano factor analysis comparing adolescent and adult firing-rate variability. The Fano factor is the slope of the trial-by-trial spike-count variance and spike-count mean for all units. Using a sliding window, this variability estimate was computed at time points around task events of interest. Fitted polynomial lines are plotted over raw Fano factor values. For both groups, the instrumental response and the period preceding entry into the food trough were accompanied by reductions in the Fano factor. Adolescents tended to have higher Fano factors than adults. Specifically, adolescents had greater Fano factors during the baseline period, in the 1 s after the trial-onset cue, in a 1 s window around the instrumental poke, and in the 1 s leading up to reinforcement retrieval. These results were not attributable to time- or age-dependent firing-rate differences, because this pattern survived a mean-matching procedure that controls for changes in firing rate (supplemental Fig. 3, available at www.jneurosci.org as supplemental material).

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Average baseline-normalized firing rate + 1 SEM (shading) for all adult and adolescent units, time-locked to task events during each of six sessions. The median taskwide firing rate for all adolescent units was 4.66 Hz, and all adult units was 5.18 Hz. Although slight, their corresponding firing-rate distributions were significantly different (rank-sum test, Z = 2.18, p = 0.03). This figure demonstrates that, in session 1 (adult, n = 47; adolescent, n = 60; first row), when the action–outcome association was not yet learned (Fig. 1c), there was little task-related activity to the cue (left), instrumental pokes (middle), or rewarded food-trough entries (right) in either group. By session 2 (adult, n = 59; adolescent, n = 60; second row), as animals learned at different rates and performed the task to varying extents, average OFC neural activity began to change around task events in both groups. From session 3 onward (session 3: adult, n = 49; adolescent, n = 64; session 4: adult, n = 46; adolescent, n = 67; session 5: adult, n = 41; adolescent, n = 72; session 6: adult, n = 48; adolescent, n = 62; third to sixth rows), average normalized neural activity settled into somewhat stable patterns in both age groups.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Phasic OFC population and single-unit activity during sessions 3–6. A, Heat plots represent the baseline-normalized firing rate for each adolescent (n = 265; top plots) and adult (n = 184; bottom plots) unit. Each row is the activity of an individual unit in 50 ms time bins aligned to corresponding events of interest and sorted from lowest to highest average normalized firing rate. Arrows indicate the timing of task events. B, Average normalized firing rate (across all units) + 1 SEM (shading) for adults (blue) and adolescents (orange) during task events. The general population activity is lower for adults than adolescents leading up to, during, and after cue onset. This continues until animals perform the instrumental response (middle). At that time, average unit activity is strikingly similar for adolescents and adults. After the instrumental response, as rats approach the food trough, adolescent average unit activity rises to a greater extent than adults and peaks at the time of food-trough entry (right). In contrast, average adult unit activity peaks before entry into the food trough. C, Time course of unit activation and inhibition. The percentage of units that are categorized as activated (top) or inhibited (bottom) are identified over time using a moving-window analysis (window size, 500 ms in 250 ms steps) and locked to task events. Adolescents had a similar percentage of activated units to the cue but significantly fewer inhibited units than adults (left) (see Table 1). During the instrumental poke (middle), adolescents and adults had similar profiles of activated and inhibited units, although adult units responded with inhibition earlier and in a more sustained manner. Around the time of reinforcement (right), adolescents ultimately had higher percentages of activated units, whereas adults consistently had higher percentages of inhibited units.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Comparison of adolescent and adult unit activity in selected windows time-locked to task events

    Task event (Window)Activated unitsInhibited units
    Adult: 14/184 (7.6%)Adult: 23/184 (12.5%)
    Cue (0 to 1 s)Adol: 11/265 (6.4%)Adol: 7/265 (2.6%)
    Adult: 21/184 (11.4%)Adult: 34/184 (18.5%)
    Poke (−0.5 to 0 s)Adol: 19/265 (7.2%)Adol: 21/265 (7.9%)
    Adult: 25/184 (13.6%)Adult: 46/184 (25.0%)
    Poke (0 to 0.5 s)Adol: 32/265 (12.1%)Adol: 56/265 (21.1%)
    Adult: 28/184 (15.2%)Adult: 46/184 (25.0%)
    Poke (1 to 1.5 s)Adol: 51/265 (19.3%)Adol: 28/265 (10.6%)
    Adult: 35/184 (19.0%)Adult: 53/184 (28.8%)
    FT entry (−0.5 to 0 s)Adol: 80/265 (30.2%)Adol: 42/265 (15.9%)
    Adult: 34/184 (18.5%)Adult: 59/184 (32.1%)
    FT entry (0 to 0.5 s)Adol: 79/265 (29.8%)Adol: 51/265 (19.3%)
    Adult: 31/184 (16.9%)Adult: 43/184 (23.4%)
    FT entry (0.5 to 1 s)Adol: 38/265 (14.3%)Adol: 46/265 (17.4%)
    • Windows of interest are time-locked to the cue, instrumental poke (Poke), or entry into the food trough (FT). The proportion of adolescent (Adol) and adult units that met criteria for significant activation or inhibition (see Materials and Methods) are indicated of the total number of units along with the categorized percentages in parentheses. In each case, significant (p < 0.05) χ2 tests (that include number of activated, inhibited, and nonsignificant) units were followed up by direct age-related comparisons with Z tests of two proportions. Significant age-related proportional difference are indicated with bold type.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Data

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • supplemental material - Supplemental Figures
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 31 (4)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 31, Issue 4
26 Jan 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reduced Neuronal Inhibition and Coordination of Adolescent Prefrontal Cortex during Motivated Behavior
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Reduced Neuronal Inhibition and Coordination of Adolescent Prefrontal Cortex during Motivated Behavior
David A. Sturman, Bita Moghaddam
Journal of Neuroscience 26 January 2011, 31 (4) 1471-1478; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4210-10.2011

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Reduced Neuronal Inhibition and Coordination of Adolescent Prefrontal Cortex during Motivated Behavior
David A. Sturman, Bita Moghaddam
Journal of Neuroscience 26 January 2011, 31 (4) 1471-1478; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4210-10.2011
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Articles

  • Choice Behavior Guided by Learned, But Not Innate, Taste Aversion Recruits the Orbitofrontal Cortex
  • Maturation of Spontaneous Firing Properties after Hearing Onset in Rat Auditory Nerve Fibers: Spontaneous Rates, Refractoriness, and Interfiber Correlations
  • Insulin Treatment Prevents Neuroinflammation and Neuronal Injury with Restored Neurobehavioral Function in Models of HIV/AIDS Neurodegeneration
Show more Articles

Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

  • Influence of Reward on Corticospinal Excitability during Movement Preparation
  • Identification and Characterization of a Sleep-Active Cell Group in the Rostral Medullary Brainstem
  • Gravin Orchestrates Protein Kinase A and β2-Adrenergic Receptor Signaling Critical for Synaptic Plasticity and Memory
Show more Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2021 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.