Source Paper
John A. Parkinson, Mary C. Olmstead, Lindsay H. Burns,
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 Pavlovian CS-US associations, conditioned reinforcement, and amphetamine-potentiated behavioral responses
This is a Pavlovian Conditioning and CS-US Association protocol using rat as the model organism. The procedure involves 6 procedural steps, 2 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
Initial Pavlovian CS-US Association Training • Excitotoxic Lesion Surgery • Post-Lesion CS-US Retraining Sessions
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 trained to associate a neutral stimulus (Pavlovian CS) with food reinforcement (US) to establish baseline Pavlovian associations
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)”
Excitotoxic lesions were performed to selectively destroy either the nucleus accumbens core or shell in separate groups of animals
Note: Two lesion groups: NAcc core-lesioned and NAcc shell-lesioned animals
“After excitotoxic lesions that selectively destroyed either the NAcc core or shell”
After lesion recovery, animals underwent additional CS-US training sessions to assess Pavlovian conditioning following selective NAcc subregion damage
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 (lever pressing) that produced the CS acting as a conditioned reinforcer (CR). Testing involved both a CR lever (reinforced with CS presentation) and a control lever (non-reinforced)
Note: Measures ability to learn new instrumental response using previously conditioned stimulus as reinforcer
“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)”
During each instrumental conditioning session, animals were infused intra-NAcc with d-amphetamine at varying doses (0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg) before the session to test dose-dependent potentiation of conditioned reinforcement and locomotor activity
Note: Dose-response design with five amphetamine dose levels including vehicle control (0 µg)
“Animals were infused intra-NAcc with d-amphetamine (0, 1, 3, 10, or 20 µg) before each session”
During testing sessions, measure responding on the CR lever (reinforced with conditioned stimulus presentation), responding on the control non-reinforced lever, and locomotor activity
Note: Selective potentiation of CR lever responding indicates intact shell function; increased responding on both levers indicates core lesion-induced deficit in selectivity
“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”
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 Pavlovian CS-US associations, conditioned reinforcement, and amphetamine-potentiated behavioral responses
Objective
To investigate the functional dissociation of nucleus accumbens (NAcc) core and shell subregions in mediating Pavlovian CS-US associations, conditioned reinforcement, and amphetamine-potentiated behavioral responses
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
Initial Pavlovian CS-US Association Training (Not specified)
Excitotoxic Lesion Surgery (Not specified)
Post-Lesion CS-US Retraining Sessions (Not specified)
Instrumental Conditioning with Conditioned Reinforcer (Not specified)
Pavlovian CS-US association strength (during retraining sessions)
From paperNot specified in methods section
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Acquisition of instrumental response using conditioned stimulus as reinforcer
From paperNot specified in methods section
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 (reinforced with CS presentation)
From paperNot specified in methods section
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 non-reinforced lever
From paperNot specified in methods section
Artifact type
Longitudinal gait metrics and per-animal performance tables
Comparison focus
Compare recovery trajectory across post-injury timepoints and treatment conditions
Pavlovian CS-US association strength (during retraining sessions)
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 of instrumental response using conditioned stimulus as reinforcer
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 CR lever (reinforced with CS presentation)
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 non-reinforced 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
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
Preprocessing / cleaning
Not specified in methods section
Scoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: Pavlovian CS-US association strength (during retraining sessions); Acquisition of instrumental response using conditioned stimulus as reinforcer; Responding on CR lever (reinforced with CS presentation); Responding on control non-reinforced lever.
Statistical comparison
Statistical method not yet structured for this page.
Reporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for Pavlovian CS-US association strength (during retraining sessions), Acquisition of instrumental response using conditioned stimulus as reinforcer, Responding on CR lever (reinforced with CS presentation), Responding on control non-reinforced lever.
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
Initial Pavlovian CS-US Association 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”
Post-Lesion CS-US Retraining Sessions • 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
“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)”
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 mentioned
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not mentioned
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not mentioned
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not mentioned
Not specified • Not mentioned
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
6
Evidence Quotes
6
Protocol Items
4
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
6
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