In this last test phase, the animal will press the lever much more when the CS+ is presented, despite never having ‘learned’ this cue-press sequence as a means of obtaining a reward. Thus, the PIT test is able to isolate the invigoration LY294002 purchase of actions by independently learned Pavlovian stimuli. Saddoris et al. (2011) trained rats following this protocol, and also included a non-predictive CS− cue and an unrewarded lever as controls. On

the PIT test day, firing of projection neurons was recorded in the nucleus accumbens core and shell, which are key substrates for the effect (Wyvell & Berridge, 2000; Corbit et al., 2001; Hall see more et al., 2001; Lex & Hauber, 2008). Behaviorally, the CS+ increased lever pressing, as confirmation of PIT. Neurally, many interesting accumbens firing differences are

reported between direction of responses, stimuli evoking them, and recording sites, further building a view of substantial heterogeneity and information multiplexing in accumbens firing. A main finding to highlight was that PIT performance levels correlated with the number of core neurons that fired more to the CS+ than to the CS− or pre-cue baseline and with the number of shell neurons that fired during lever pressing more robustly when the CS+ was present (i.e. PIT-modulated). This potentially indicates a distinct contribution for the core in assigning motivational value to reward-predictive cues to arouse behavior, and for the shell in integrating learned cue and action information to guide PIT performance. In a separate experiment, rats underwent a period of cocaine self-administration after the learning phases, which led them, in the PIT test, to press even more Meloxicam during the CS+ than control groups. The clear PIT enhancement

coincided with a similarly clear increase in the number of shell (but not core) neurons firing more to rewarded versus unrewarded stimuli and actions, as well as in the number of PIT-modulated neurons in both shell and core. Food cup entry and related firing was unaffected, bolstering the conclusion that firing reflected PIT rather than general reward pursuit or psychomotor activation. Thus, it would seem that these data reveal elements of firing plasticity that could contribute to the influence of dopamine on PIT (Dickinson et al., 2000; Wyvell & Berridge, 2000; Lex & Hauber, 2008), and to the inflated capacity of independently learned cues to motivate reward seeking in addiction states (Wyvell & Berridge, 2001). One suspects, on the basis of the many brain sites implicated in PIT, that the accumbens is contributing particular component features.