Source Paper
John A. Parkinson, Mary C. Olmstead,
Journal of Neuroscience • 1999
Dopamine release within the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) has been associated with both the rewarding and locomotor-stimulant effects of abused drugs. The functions of the NAcc core and shell were investigated in mediating amphetamine-potentiated conditioned reinforcement and locomotion. Rats were initially trained to associate a neutral stimulus (Pavlovian CS) with food reinforcement (US). After excitotoxic lesions that selectively destroyed either the NAcc core or shell, animals underwent additional CS–US training sessions and then were tested for the acquisition of a new instrumental response that produced the CS acting as a conditioned reinforcer (CR). Animals were infused intra-NAcc with d -amphetamine (0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg) before each session. Shell lesions affected neither Pavlovian nor instrumental conditioning but completely abolished the potentiative effect of intra-NAcc amphetamine on responding with CR. Core-lesioned animals were impaired during the Pavlovian retraining sessions but showed no deficit in the acquisition of responding with CR. However, the selectivity in stimulant-induced potentiation of the CR lever was reduced, as intra-NAcc amphetamine infusions dose-dependently increased responding on both the CR lever and a nonreinforced (control) lever. Shell lesions produced hypoactivity and attenuated amphetamine-induced activity. In contrast, core lesions resulted in hyperactivity and enhanced the locomotor-stimulating effect of amphetamine. These results indicate a functional dissociation of subregions of the NAcc; the shell is a critical site for stimulant effects underlying the enhancement of responding with CR and locomotion after intra-NAcc injections of amphetamine, whereas the core is implicated in mechanisms underlying the expression of CS–US associations.
Objective: To investigate the functional dissociation of nucleus accumbens (NAcc) core and shell subregions in mediating amphetamine-potentiated conditioned reinforcement and locomotor activity in rats
This is a Intra-NAcc Amphetamine Infusion and Drug Response Testing protocol using rat as the model organism. The procedure involves 7 procedural steps, 3 equipment items, 2 materials. Extracted from a 1999 paper published in Journal of Neuroscience.
Model and subjects
rat • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Study window
Estimated timing pending
Core workflow
Pavlovian conditioning training • Excitotoxic lesion surgery • Post-lesion Pavlovian retraining
Primary readouts
Key equipment and reagents
Verified items
0
Direct vendor links
0
Use this page as an execution guide, then fall back to the source paper whenever you need exact exclusions, dosing details, or assay-specific caveats.
Confirm first
Use the page like this
Start here. The step list is optimized for running the experiment, with direct vendor links available inline when you need to source a cited item.
Rats were initially trained to associate a neutral stimulus (Pavlovian CS) with food reinforcement (US)
Note: This is the initial training phase before lesion surgery
“Rats were initially trained to associate a neutral stimulus (Pavlovian CS) with food reinforcement (US)”
Selective excitotoxic lesions were made to destroy either the NAcc core or shell, with sham-lesioned controls
Note: Lesions were selective to either core or shell subregion
“After excitotoxic lesions that selectively destroyed either the NAcc core or shell, animals underwent additional CS–US training sessions”
After lesion surgery, animals underwent additional CS–US training sessions to reestablish the Pavlovian association
Note: Core-lesioned animals showed impairment during these sessions; shell-lesioned animals showed no deficit
“After excitotoxic lesions that selectively destroyed either the NAcc core or shell, animals underwent additional CS–US training sessions”
Animals were tested for acquisition of a new instrumental response that produced the CS acting as a conditioned reinforcer (CR)
Note: This measures the ability to learn a new response reinforced by the previously conditioned stimulus
“then were tested for the acquisition of a new instrumental response that produced the CS acting as a conditioned reinforcer (CR)”
Animals were infused intra-NAcc with d-amphetamine at doses of 0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg before each session during instrumental conditioning testing
Note: Infusions were given before each session to assess dose-dependent effects on CR responding and locomotor activity
“Animals were infused intra-NAcc with d-amphetamine (0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg) before each session”
During amphetamine infusion sessions, responding on both the CR lever (reinforced) and control lever (nonreinforced) was measured
Note: Core-lesioned animals showed reduced selectivity with amphetamine increasing responding on both levers
“intra-NAcc amphetamine infusions dose-dependently increased responding on both the CR lever and a nonreinforced (control) lever”
Locomotor activity was measured during amphetamine infusion sessions to assess stimulant effects
Note: Shell lesions produced hypoactivity and attenuated amphetamine-induced activity; core lesions produced hyperactivity and enhanced amphetamine effects
“Shell lesions produced hypoactivity and attenuated amphetamine-induced activity. In contrast, core lesions resulted in hyperactivity and enhanced the locomotor-stimulating effect of amphetamine”
This section explains what the experiment is doing, which readouts matter, what the data artifacts usually look like, and how the analysis should flow from raw capture to reported result.
To investigate the functional dissociation of nucleus accumbens (NAcc) core and shell subregions in mediating amphetamine-potentiated conditioned reinforcement and locomotor activity in rats
Objective
To investigate the functional dissociation of nucleus accumbens (NAcc) core and shell subregions in mediating amphetamine-potentiated conditioned reinforcement and locomotor activity in rats
Subjects
From paperrat • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Sample count
From paperNot specified
Cohort notes
From paperAnimals underwent excitotoxic lesions of either NAcc core or shell, or sham lesions
Pavlovian conditioning training (Not specified)
Excitotoxic lesion surgery (Not specified)
Post-lesion Pavlovian retraining (Not specified)
Instrumental conditioning with conditioned reinforcer (Not specified)
Responding on CR lever (conditioned reinforcer-producing lever)
From paperNot specified in provided text
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Responding on control lever (nonreinforced lever)
From paperNot specified in provided text
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Locomotor activity during amphetamine infusion
From paperNot specified in provided text
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Pavlovian conditioning acquisition and retention
From paperNot specified in provided text
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Responding on CR lever (conditioned reinforcer-producing lever)
From paperRaw artifact
Per-run gait capture with paw placement, timing, and stride features for each animal
Processed artifact
Cleaned gait metrics table and recovery trend summary across timepoints
Final reported form
Group comparisons of gait indices, stride metrics, or recovery curves
Responding on control lever (nonreinforced lever)
From paperRaw artifact
Per-run gait capture with paw placement, timing, and stride features for each animal
Processed artifact
Cleaned gait metrics table and recovery trend summary across timepoints
Final reported form
Group comparisons of gait indices, stride metrics, or recovery curves
Locomotor activity during amphetamine infusion
From paperRaw artifact
Per-run gait capture with paw placement, timing, and stride features for each animal
Processed artifact
Cleaned gait metrics table and recovery trend summary across timepoints
Final reported form
Group comparisons of gait indices, stride metrics, or recovery curves
Pavlovian conditioning acquisition and retention
From paperRaw artifact
Per-run gait capture with paw placement, timing, and stride features for each animal
Processed artifact
Cleaned gait metrics table and recovery trend summary across timepoints
Final reported form
Group comparisons of gait indices, stride metrics, or recovery curves
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
Preprocessing / cleaning
Not specified in provided text
Scoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: Responding on CR lever (conditioned reinforcer-producing lever); Responding on control lever (nonreinforced lever); Locomotor activity during amphetamine infusion; Pavlovian conditioning acquisition and retention.
Statistical comparison
Statistical method not yet structured for this page.
Reporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for Responding on CR lever (conditioned reinforcer-producing lever), Responding on control lever (nonreinforced lever), Locomotor activity during amphetamine infusion, Pavlovian conditioning acquisition and retention.
Source links and direct wording from the methods section for validation and deeper review.
Citation
John A. Parkinson et al. (1999). Dissociation in Effects of Lesions of the Nucleus Accumbens Core and Shell on Appetitive Pavlovian Approach Behavior and the Potentiation of Conditioned Reinforcement and Locomotor Activity byd-Amphetamine. Journal of Neuroscience
Pavlovian conditioning training • Protocol step
“Rats were initially trained to associate a neutral stimulus (Pavlovian CS) with food reinforcement (US)”
Excitotoxic lesion surgery • Protocol step
“After excitotoxic lesions that selectively destroyed either the NAcc core or shell, animals underwent additional CS–US training sessions”
Instrumental conditioning with conditioned reinforcer • Protocol step
“then were tested for the acquisition of a new instrumental response that produced the CS acting as a conditioned reinforcer (CR)”
Intra-NAcc amphetamine infusion and testing • Protocol step
“Animals were infused intra-NAcc with d-amphetamine (0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg) before each session”
Direct vendor pages are linked from the protocol above. This section stays focused on the full comparison view and the prep checklist.
Gather these items before starting the experiment. Check off items as you prepare.
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Use this section as the page quality checkpoint. It keeps section navigation, evidence access, readiness, and verification meaning in one place.
Current status surfaces were computed from experiment data updated Feb 28, 2026.
Source access
Jump back into the original paper or the methods evidence section when you need exact wording, exclusions, or method-specific caveats.
This protocol has structured steps plus evidence quotes, and is ready for canonical sync.
Steps
7
Evidence Quotes
6
Protocol Items
5
Linked Products
0
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this means
The completeness score reflects how much structured protocol data is present: steps, methods evidence, listed materials, linked products, and paper provenance.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
Canonical Sync shows whether a ConductGraph-backed protocol is available for this experiment route right now. It is a sync-status signal, not a claim that every downstream vendor link or step detail is perfect.
Steps
7
Evidence
6
Specific Products
0/0
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this score means
The verification score reflects evidence coverage, subject detail, paper provenance, step depth, and whether linked products resolve to specific item pages instead of generic searches.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
A page can have structured steps and still need review when evidence is thin, product links are generic, or canonical protocol coverage is still pending.
What still needs work