Novelty increases the mesolimbic functional connectivity of the substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (SN/VTA) during reward anticipation: Evidence from high-resolution fMRI.

Reward and novelty are potent learning signals that critically rely on dopaminergic midbrain responses. Recent findings suggest that although reward and novelty are likely to interact, both functions may be subserved by distinct neuronal clusters. We used high-resolution functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to isolate neural responses to reward and novelty within the human substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (SN/VTA) complex to investigate the spatial delineation and integration of reward- and novelty-related activity clusters. We demonstrate that distinct clusters within the caudal portion of the medial SN/VTA and the lateral portion of the right SN are predominantly modulated by the anticipation of reward, while a more rostral part of the medial SN/VTA was exclusively modulated by novelty. In addition, the caudal medial SN/VTA cluster embodied an interaction between novelty and reward where novelty selectively increased reward-anticipation responses. This interaction, in turn, was paralleled by differences in the functional-connectivity patterns of these SN/VTA regions. Specifically, novel as compared to familiar reward-predictive stimuli increased the functional connectivity of the medial SN/VTA with mesolimbic regions, including the nucleus accumbens and the hippocampus, as well as with the primary visual cortex. This functional correlation may highlight how afferents of the medial SN/VTA provide integrative information about novelty and reward, or, alternatively, how medial SN/VTA activity may modulate memory processes for novel events associated with rewards.

Pinning down response inhibition in the brain--conjunction analyses of the Stop-signal task.

Successful behavior requires a finely-tuned interplay of initiating and inhibiting motor programs to react effectively to constantly changing environmental demands. One particularly useful paradigm for investigating inhibitory motor control is the Stop-signal task, where already-initiated responses to Go-stimuli are to be inhibited upon the rapid subsequent presentation of a Stop-stimulus (yielding successful and unsuccessful Stop-trials). Despite the extensive use of this paradigm in functional neuroimaging, there is no consensus on which functional comparison to use to characterize response-inhibition-related brain activity. Here, we utilize conjunction analyses of successful and unsuccessful Stop-trials that are each contrasted against a reference condition. This conjunction approach identifies processes common to both Stop-trial types while excluding processes specific to either, thereby capitalizing on the presence of some response-inhibition-related activity in both conditions. Using this approach on fMRI data from human subjects, we identify a network of brain structures that was linked to both types of Stop-trials, including lateral-inferior frontal and medial frontal cortical areas and the caudate nucleus. In addition, comparisons with a reference condition matched for visual stimulation identified additional activity in the right inferior parietal cortex that may play a role in enhancing the processing of the Stop-stimuli. Finally, differences in stopping efficacy across subjects were associated with variations in activity in the left anterior insula. However, this region was also associated with general task accuracy (which furthermore correlated directly with stopping efficacy), suggesting that it might actually reflect a more general mechanism of performance control that supports response inhibition in a relatively nonspecific way.

Sensory MEG responses predict successful and failed inhibition in a stop-signal task.

In the present study magnetoencephalographic recordings were performed to investigate the neural mechanisms underlying the stopping of manual responses. Subjects performed in a Stop-signal task in which Go-stimuli (S1), requiring a rapid motor response, were sometimes rapidly followed by a Stop-stimulus (S2) indicating to withhold the already initiated response to S1. Success of stopping strongly depended on the early perceptual processing of S1 and S2 reflected by the magnetic N1 component. Enhanced processing of S1 facilitated the execution of the movement, whereas enhanced processing of S2 favored its inhibition. This suggests that the processing resources for the subsequent stimuli are limited and need to be shared. This sharing of resources appeared to arise from adjustments made on a trial-by-trial basis, in that systematic reaction time prolongations on Go-trials following Stop-trials versus following Go-trials were accompanied by attenuated sensory processing to the Go-stimulus similar to that seen in successful versus unsuccessful stopping in Stop-trials.