Extended Data Fig. 7: Inactivation of GABAergic neurons (via hM4d(Gi)) impairs satiety-induced devaluation and conditioned taste aversion.
From: Disinhibition of the orbitofrontal cortex biases decision-making in obesity
a) Body weights of mCherry (n = 7) and hM4d(Gi) (n = 9) are similar: Unpaired t-test: t (14) =0.1395, p = 0.8910. Data are presented as mean values + /− SEM. b) Lean mCherry (n = 7) and hM4d(Gi) (n = 9) were trained to lever press on a RR5, RR10 and RR20 schedule. The learning slope is not different between lean and obese mice. Simple linear regression of slopes: F (1,44) = 0.02496, p = 0.8752. There is no difference in the intercepts: F (1,45) = 0.01782, p = 0.8944. Data are presented as mean values + /− SEM. c) Lean mCherry (n = 7) and hM4d(Gi) (n = 9) drink the same amount of sucrose in the pre consumption test. Two-way ANOVA: virus effect: F (1, 14) = 2.549, p = 0.1327, Drug effect: F (1, 14) = 3.064, p = 0.1019, Drug and diet interaction: F (1, 14) = 0.001013, p = 0.9751. Data are presented as mean values + /− SEM. d) Body weights of mCherry (n = 12) and hM4d(Gi) (n = 13) are the same: Unpaired t-test: t (23) =0.7069, p = 0.4867. Data are presented as mean values + /− SEM. e) Lean mCherry (n = 12) and hM4d(Gi) (n = 13) underwent pairing where a novel gelatine flavor was paired with LiCl inducing sickness, or vehicle. 3-way RM ANOVA: Conditioning day effect: F (1.924, 44.25) = 6.360, p = 0.0041**, virus effect: F (1, 23) = 2.344, p = 0.1394, value effect F (1.000, 23.00) = 0.3603, p = 0.5542, day × virus interaction: F (2, 46) = 0.1939, p = 0.8244, day × value interaction: F (1.890, 43.46) = 0.4546, p = 0.6267, virus × value interaction: F (1, 23) = 0.002321, p = 0.9620, day × virus × value F (2, 46) = 1.432, p = 0.2493. Data are presented as mean values + /− SEM.
