Fig. 2: D1- and D2-neurons of the NAc are differentially activated during reward consumption and oppositely regulate reward consumption in a pavlovian conditioning paradigm.

A Schematic representation of the procedure and representative image of sensors expression and fiber implantation. Bar scale 2.5 mm. B Effect of chemogenetic inhibition (DREADD Gi, D2-neurons n = 7, D1-neurons n = 6) and activation (DREADD Gq, n = 8, D1-neurons n = 9) of either D2-neurons or D1-neurons on the number of licks on the trough that delivers the reward (Two-sided paired t-test; D2 Gi p = 0.0179, D2 Gq p = 0.0281, D1 Gi p = 0.0127, D1 Gq p = 0.0008). C, D Comparison of bulk calcium dynamics in D1- (n = 5 mice) and D2-neurons (n = 5 mice) aligned to the onset of the conditioned stimuli (CS, D1 events=528; D2 events=591) (C), or to the onset of feeding (lick, D1 events=593; D2 events=660) and quantification of the AUC and average z-score (D), measured through expression of the calcium sensor GcAMP in the NAc, in a pavlovian conditioning paradigm (Two-way ANOVA; Lick AUC: Group effect F(1, 2502) = 9.477, p = 0.0021; Lick Average Zscore: Group effect F(1, 2502) = 4.301, p = 0.0382; Post-hoc D1 vs D2 2s-0s p = 0.0043). E, F Effect of chemogenetic activation of D1-neurons (D1 Gq, n = 4 mice) on dopamine dynamics and quantification of the AUC and average z-score, measured through the dopamine sensor dLight coupled with fiber photometry in the NAc, aligned with CS onset (E; events Saline = 252; events CNO = 168) or lick (F; events Saline = 271; events CNO = 184) (Two-way RM ANOVA; AUC CNO effect F(1, 455) = 4.010, p = 0.0458). G, H Effect of chemogenetic activation of D2-neurons (D2 Gq, n = 3 mice) on calcium dynamics measured through the dopamine sensor dLight coupled with fiber photometry in the NAc, aligned with CS onset (G; events Saline = 170; events CNO = 105) or lick onset (H; events Saline = 192; events CNO = 112) (Two-way RM ANOVA; AUC CNO effect F(1, 302) = 31.40, p = 0.0001; Post-hoc Sal vs CNO 0-2 s p = 0.0001; Average Z score CNO effect F(1, 302) = 32.06 p = 0.0001; Post-hoc Sal vs CNO 0-2 s p = 0.0001). p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.001; Error bars = s.e.m. Detailed statistics are displayed in Supplementary Table 2. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.