Source Paper
The amygdala central nucleus and appetitive Pavlovian conditioning: lesions impair one class of conditioned behavior
M Gallagher, PW Graham, PC Holland
Journal of Neuroscience • 1990
Differential Conditioning
Objective: To assess acquisition of CS-generated and US-generated conditioned responses in rats during differential conditioning, and to evaluate the role of the amygdala central nucleus in appetitive Pavlovian conditioning
Gather these items before starting the experiment. Check off items as you prepare.
Equipment2
not specified • not specified • not specified • not specified
not specified • not specified • not specified • not specified
Materials1
not specified • not specified • not specified • not specified
As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases. Product links help support this free resource.
Protocol Steps
Surgical lesioning (for lesion group)
Rats in the lesion condition received neurotoxic lesions of the amygdala central nucleus prior to conditioning
Note: Only lesioned rats underwent this procedure; control rats did not receive lesions
View evidence from paper
“Rats with neurotoxic lesions of the amygdala central nucleus (CN) were trained using appetitive Pavlovian conditioning procedures”
Differential conditioning training
Rats received reinforced presentations of one sensory cue (either visual or auditory) paired with food, and nonreinforced presentations of the other cue. Half of each lesion condition received reinforced visual/nonreinforced auditory; the other half received reinforced auditory/nonreinforced visual
Note: Both lesioned and unlesioned rats underwent this training with counterbalanced cue assignments
View evidence from paper
“During differential conditioning, some lesioned and unlesioned rats received reinforced presentations of a visual cue and nonreinforced presentations of an auditory cue, and the others in each lesion condition received reinforced auditory and nonreinforced visual cue presentations”
Monitoring of conditioned responses
Two classes of conditioned responses were monitored: CS-generated CRs (resembling orienting responses elicited by CSs prior to pairing) and US-generated CRs (resembling behavior elicited by food reinforcement itself)
Note: Responses were recorded during conditioning trials to assess acquisition
View evidence from paper
“Conditioned responses (CRs) that are representative of 2 classes of behavior were monitored. One type of CR resembled the orienting responses that were elicited by the conditioned stimuli (CSs) prior to pairing with food reinforcement: the other type of CR resembled the behavior elicited by food reinforcement itself”
Assessment of orienting responses and habituation
Orienting responses and habituation to the conditioned stimuli were evaluated and compared between lesion and control groups
Note: These measures were used to determine if differences in CR acquisition were due to general sensory or motor deficits
View evidence from paper
“Orienting responses and habituation to the CSs were, however, comparable for the lesion and control groups”