Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 17.
Published in final edited form as: Mol Psychiatry. 2021 Nov 17;27(3):1502–1514. doi: 10.1038/s41380-021-01364-y

Figure 4. D2R upregulation in NAc CINs impairs No-Go responding.

Figure 4.

A. Schematic of first training phase consisting of 60 Go trials. Each Go trial is started with house light illumination and lever presentation, and mice must press the lever within 5 s to receive a reward. New trials begin after a variable ITI. B. Go responding was measured across 8 days and expressed as the average percent correct Go trials. This “hit rate” increased similarly in both groups with training (day effect: F(7,161) = 21.8, p < 0.0001; AAV effect: F(1,23) = 0.011, p = 0.91; AAV x day interaction: F(7,161) = 0.75, p = 0.63). EGFP, n = 11; D2, n = 14 mice. C. In the second phase, which consisted of 30 days, 30 Go trials were intermixed with 30 No-Go trials. Unlike Go trials, No-Go trials were signaled by the presentation of the lever and LED lights above the lever without a house light. Withholding from pressing for 5 s during No-Go trial led to reward. D. D2R upregulation did not alter accuracy of responding during Go trials (AAV effect: F(1,23) = 0.52, p = 0.48); AAV x day interaction (F(29,662) = 1.183, p = 0.24). EGFP, n = 11; D2, n = 14 mice. E. In No-Go trials, premature responding (false alarm rate) decreased with training in both groups (day effect: F(29,663) = 88.97, p < 0.0001), yet this transition was significantly delayed in D2R-OENacChAT mice (AAV x day interaction: F(29,663) = 3.099, *p < 0.0001). EGFP, n = 11; D2, n = 14 mice.