Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2023 Aug 17;26(9):1566–1574. doi: 10.1038/s41593-023-01409-1

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Author(s) 2023

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

PMC Copyright notice

Extended Data Fig. 3 — a-d. Optical stimulation does not alter economic decision-making in animals expressing EYFP in the OFC. a. Schematic of experimental preparation. b. Probability of choosing blackcurrant-predictive cue as a function of difference in the volume of available rewards for no illumination (green) and illumination (magenta) trials (n = 6 rats, two-way repeated-measures). Inset, fraction of trials in which animal chose the larger available reward on no illumination (green) and illumination (magenta) trials (n = 6 rats, two-sided paired t-test). c. Latency to choice nosepoke response as a function of the absolute difference in the size of rewards available on no illumination (green) and illumination (magenta) trials (n = 6 rats, two-way repeated-measures ANOVA). d. Juice preferences computed on trials with OFC illumination are correlated with juice preferences computed on trials without OFC illumination (Pearson’s correlation). e. Schematic of control task for probing whether effects of optical inhibition specifically impact choice behavior. f, g. Latency to nosepoke response for cues predicting different size rewards in control no-choice task on trials in which the OFC (f) or DMS (g) was not inhibited (green) or was inhibited (magenta). OFC or DMS inhibition did not alter latencies to respond in no-choice control task (OFC: n = 12 rats, DMS< n = 6 rats, two-way repeated-measures ANOVA). * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, Data are presented as mean ± SEM.