Response suppression in rats: A comparison of response-contingent and noncontingent punishment and the effect of the minor tranquilizer, chlordiazepoxide

1975 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicia A. Huppert ◽  
Susan D. Iversen
Keyword(s):  
Response Suppression ◽  
Response Contingent

Discrimination of Response-Contingent and Response-Independent Shock by Rats: Effects of Chlordiazepoxide HCL and Sodium Amylobarbitone

1980 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. N. P. Rawlins ◽  
J. Feldon ◽  
Jeffrey A. Gray
Keyword(s):  
Response Rates ◽  
Response Suppression ◽  
Random Interval ◽  
Sucrose Reward ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Response Contingent ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Lever Pressing ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Different Response

Rats, trained to press a lever for sucrose reward on a random interval (RI) schedule, were presented while lever-pressing with two stimuli, each associated with a different schedule of shock delivery: in the presence of one stimulus (Se), shock occurred on an RI schedule irrespective of the rat's behaviour; in the presence of the other (Sp) shocks were programmed by the same schedule but delivered only when the rat pressed the lever. Both stimuli suppressed lever-pressing. In addition, the rats developed significantly different response rates in the two stimuli, thus demonstrating a discrimination between response-contingent and response-independent shock. Group data showed faster responding in Se than in Sp, supporting the view that response-contingent shock produces greater suppression than response-independent shock. Individual animal analyses, however, demonstrated that this was the case in the majority of animals, but not in all. Response suppression was alleviated by amylobarbitone sodium (15 mg/kg) or chlordiazepoxide HCI (5 mg/kg); the latter drug alleviated suppression significantly more in Sp than Se and eliminated the difference between the response rates controlled by the two stimuli.

scholarly journals The Functional Role of Response Suppression during an Urge to Relieve Pain

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 1404-1421
Author(s):  
Kelsey K. Sundby ◽  
Johanna Wagner ◽  
Adam R. Aron
Keyword(s):  
Short Interval ◽  
Intracortical Inhibition ◽  
Gabaergic Interneuron ◽  
Response Suppression ◽  
Active Response ◽  
Relieve Pain ◽  
Clinical Disorders ◽  
Functional Relevance ◽  
Interneuron Activity

Being in the state of having both a strong impulse to act and a simultaneous need to withhold is commonly described as an “urge.” Although urges are part of everyday life and also important to several clinical disorders, the components of urge are poorly understood. It has been conjectured that withholding an action during urge involves active response suppression. We tested that idea by designing an urge paradigm that required participants to resist an impulse to press a button and gain relief from heat (one hand was poised to press while the other arm had heat stimulation). We first used paired-pulse TMS over motor cortex (M1) to measure corticospinal excitability of the hand that could press for relief, while participants withheld movement. We observed increased short-interval intracortical inhibition, an index of M1 GABAergic interneuron activity that was maintained across seconds and specific to the task-relevant finger. A second experiment replicated this. We next used EEG to better “image” putative cortical signatures of motor suppression and pain. We found increased sensorimotor beta contralateral to the task-relevant hand while participants withheld the movement during heat. We interpret this as further evidence of a motor suppressive process. Additionally, there was beta desynchronization contralateral to the arm with heat, which could reflect a pain signature. Strikingly, participants who “suppressed” more exhibited less of a putative “pain” response. We speculate that, during urge, a suppressive state may have functional relevance for both resisting a prohibited action and for mitigating discomfort.

Differential Gurmarin Suppression of Sweet Taste Responses in Rat Solitary Nucleus Neurons

2003 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 911-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian H. Lemon ◽  
Toshiaki Imoto ◽  
David V. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Sucrose Concentration ◽  
Hierarchical Cluster ◽  
Initial Response ◽  
Sweet Taste ◽  
Induced Response ◽  
Response Suppression ◽  
Response Profiles ◽  
Neuronal Type ◽  
Concentration Series

We examined the effect of the sweet transduction blocker gurmarin on taste responses recorded from neurons in the rat solitary nucleus (NST) to determine how gurmarin sensitivity is distributed across neuronal type. Initially, responses evoked by washing the anterior tongue and palate with 0.5 M sucrose, 0.1 M NaCl, 0.01 M HCl, and 0.01 M quinine-HCl were recorded from 35 neurons. For some cells, responses to a sucrose concentration series (0.01–1.0 M) or an array of sweet-tasting compounds were also measured. Gurmarin (10 μg/ml, 2–4 ml) was then applied to the tongue and palate. Stimuli were reapplied after 10–15 min. Neurons were segregated into groups based on similarities among their initial response profiles using hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA). Results indicated that sucrose responses recorded from neurons representative of each HCA-defined class were suppressed by gurmarin. However, a disproportionate percentage of cells in each group displayed sucrose responses that were substantially attenuated after gurmarin treatment. Postgurmarin sucrose responses recorded from neurons that composed 57% of class S, 40% of class N, and 33% of class H were suppressed by ≥50% relative to control. On average, attenuation was statistically significant only in class S and N neurons. Although the magnitude of gurmarin-induced response suppression did not differ across sucrose concentration, responses to different sweet-tasting compounds were differentially affected. Responses to NaCl, HCl, or quinine were not suppressed by gurmarin. Results suggest that information from gurmarin-sensitive and -insensitive receptor processes converges onto single NST neurons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document