Male Wistar rats were trained to self-administer ethanol intravenously and received intra-NAc infusions of vehicle or the selective mGluR5 antagonist 3-((2-methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl)pyridine (MTEP) alone and in combination with a PKCE > translocation inhibitor (E > V1-2) or a scrambled control peptide (sE > V1-2). The effects of intra-NAc MTEP on food-reinforced responding and open-field locomotor activity

were also determined.

MTEP (1 mu g/mu l) had no effect on ethanol or food reinforcement or locomotor activity when infused into either region. MTEP (3 mu g/mu l) reduced ethanol reinforcement when infused into the NAc shell but not the core, and this effect was reversed by E > V1-2 (1 mu g/mu l) but not sE > V1-2 (1 mu g/mu

l). In both regions, this concentration of MTEP did not alter food-reinforced responding or locomotor activity, and infusion of E > V1-2 Selleckchem Dactolisib alone did not alter ethanol reinforcement. MTEP (10 mu g/mu l) reduced locomotor activity when infused into the shell; therefore, this concentration was not further tested on responding for ethanol or food.

Blockade of mGluR5 receptors in the NAc shell reduces ethanol reinforcement LOXO-101 mouse via a PKCE >-dependent mechanism.”
“According to the simulation theory, the internal simulation of a movement (imagined movement, IM) and its execution (actual movement, AM) are based on the same motor representations. The brain uses these representations for controlling action. The specific objective of this study Adenosine triphosphate was to investigate the updating process of internal models of action in adults, through massive environmental changes involved by microgravity (0G). 0G has multiple effects on motor control, including short-term adaptations with

respect to the planification and performance of actions. However, the effects of 0G on internal representations of action are still largely unknown. To address this issue, thirteen subjects performed first sit-to-stand (STS) and back-to-sit (BTS) tasks, and subsequently had to imagine movement performance in these tasks. The tasks were performed under normogravity (1G) and 0G conditions. Based on durations of actual and IMs, two main results emerged from this study. In 1G, actual and IM’s durations were similar. However, in 0G, AM durations were significantly longer than IM durations. Furthermore, IM durations in 0G were similar to the 1G value. These results show that although the planification and execution of action were immediately adapted to the 0G condition, the storage of afferent information was inadequate to recalibrate the predictive model. These results suggest that sudden change in gravity was not considered for updating internal models of action, and that forward model probably required more practice in order to integrate the modification of the sensorial feedback generated by the new environmental constraints. (C) 2012 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.