Skip to main content
. 2019 Nov 20;39(47):9277–9293. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1395-19.2019

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

GABABR activity reduces synaptic efficacy at glutamatergic synapses onto D1(+) and D1(−) MSNs in the NAc core. A, Schematic of parasagittal D1tdTomato mouse brain slice outlining the recording area within the dorsomedial NAc core. B, C, Representative experiments and traces of eEPSCs obtained from D1(+) MSNs (blue circles) and D1(−) MSNs (open circles). Scale bars: left, 300 pA/50 ms; right, 100 pA/50 ms. D, Time course of normalized eEPSCs obtained from D1(+) and D1(−) MSNs in the presence of GABABR agonist, BAC (3 μm), followed by GABABR antagonist, SCH 50911 (5 μm). BAC decreased eEPSC amplitude that returns to baseline in the presence of SCH 50911. E, Average eEPSC amplitude following BAC (t = 20–25) and SCH 50911 (t = 35–40). F, BAC dose–response curve (200 nm, 600 nm, 3 and 10 μm) obtained from D1(+) MSNs and D1(−) MSNs showing increased sensitivity to BAC at D1(+) MSNs. Note: 3 μm values obtained from averaged eEPSC values in D. G, Rough traces NMDAR-mediated eEPSCs obtained at +40 mV from D1(+) and D1(−) MSNs in the continuous presence of NBQX. Scale bars, 100 pA/100 ms. H, Time course summary and average NMDAR eEPSCs following BAC (t = 15–20 min). I, Prior application of SCH 50911 alone does not significantly alter eEPSC amplitude and blocks the actions of BAC. Error bars indicate SEM. *p < 0.05.