↓ Skip to main content

Blocking NMDA-receptors in the pigeon’s “prefrontal” caudal nidopallium impairs appetitive extinction learning in a sign-tracking paradigm

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Blocking NMDA-receptors in the pigeon’s “prefrontal” caudal nidopallium impairs appetitive extinction learning in a sign-tracking paradigm
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00085
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Lengersdorf, David Marks, Metin Uengoer, Maik C. Stüttgen, Onur Güntürkün

Abstract

Extinction learning provides the ability to flexibly adapt to new contingencies by learning to inhibit previously acquired associations in a context-dependent manner. The neural networks underlying extinction learning were mostly studied in rodents using fear extinction paradigms. To uncover invariant properties of the neural basis of extinction learning, we employ pigeons as a model system. Since the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of mammals is a key structure for extinction learning, we assessed the role of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) in the nidopallium caudolaterale (NCL), the avian functional equivalent of mammalian PFC. Since NMDARs in PFC have been shown to be relevant for extinction learning, we locally antagonized NMDARs through 2-Amino-5-phosphonovalerianacid (APV) during extinction learning in a within-subject sign-tracking ABA-renewal paradigm. APV-injection slowed down extinction learning and in addition also caused a disinhibition of responding to a continuously reinforced control stimulus. In subsequent retrieval sessions, spontaneous recovery was increased while ABA renewal was unaffected. The effect of APV resembles that observed in studies of fear extinction with rodents, suggesting common neural substrates of extinction under both appetitive and aversive conditions and highlighting the similarity of mammalian PFC and the avian caudal nidopallium despite 300 million years of independent evolution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Researcher 6 25%
Professor 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 25%
Neuroscience 6 25%
Psychology 5 21%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2016.
All research outputs
#15,404,272
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,232
of 3,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,643
of 264,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#53
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,190 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.