Fig. 3. Experiment 3: chemogenetic inhibition of CeA-projecting IL neurons impaired safety expression.
A Schematic showing intersectional viral strategy for expressing hM4Di-mCherry in CeA-projecting IL neurons. Bi mCherry expression for one rat in the IL with little to no spillover into prelimbic cortex. Bii GFP expression for one rat in the CeA marking the infusion site, showing little to now spillover into the BLA. C, left All rats received vehicle prior to DC1-3. During DC3, percent time spent freezing was higher to the fear cue compared to the fear + safety cue (*p < 0.05 compared to fear cue). C, right Using a within-subjects design, rats received CNO before either DC4 or DC5, and vehicle before the other session. Under vehicle conditions, percent time freezing to the fear cue was significantly higher than the fear + safety cue but not in the CNO condition (*p < 0.05 compared to fear cue). D Percent time freezing in rats that either did not show detectable mCherry expression or off-target expression shown as “Misses”. Under both vehicle and CNO conditions, percent time freezing was significantly higher to the fear cue compared to the fear + safety cue (**p < 0.01 compared to fear cue). E, left All rats received vehicle prior to DC1-3. During DC3, percent time at port was higher to the reward cue compared to fear (*p < 0.05) and fear + safety (*p < 0.05) cues. E, right Using a within-subjects design, rats received CNO before either DC4 or DC5, and vehicle before the other session. Under both vehicle and CNO conditions, percent time at port was significantly higher to the reward cue than all other cues (***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001 compared to reward cue). F Percent time at port in rats that either did not show detectable mCherry expression or off-target expression shown as “Misses”. Under both vehicle and CNO conditions, percent time at port was significantly higher to the reward cue compared to all other cues (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compared to reward cue).