Prefronto-subcortical imbalance characterizes poor decision-making: neurochemical and neural functional evidences in rats
Brain Structure & Function
Aurélie Fitoussi, Catherine Le Moine, Philippe De Deurwaerdère, Matéo Laqui,Marion Rivalan, Martine Cador and Françoise Dellu-Hagedorn
Corresponding author: Dr. Françoise Dellu-Hagedorn, CNRS, University of Bordeaux, France.Email:
Supplementary Material
1 - Supplemental methods
Regions of interest
The targeted circuit includes the following regions (n=11), with bregma coordinates (from Paxinos and Watson, 1997): OFC (Orbitofrontal cortex) including medial orbital (MO), ventral (VO), lateral (LO) and dorsolateral (DLO) parts, PL (prelimbic cortex), IL (Infralimbic cortex), Ins (Insula), M1 (primary motor area), CgA (Anterior cingular cortex), DMS (Dorso-medial striatum), Core and Shell part of the accumbens (Nacc), DLS (Dorso-lateral striatum), Amy (amygdala) including BLA (basolateral) and CE (Central) nuclei. Data presented on figure 6 for OFC Fos expression correspond to the average of the medial and lateral parts. No difference was reported in the Dorsolateral part (see table S2).Fos-positive cells counting was performed within the entire region described below, whereas for monoamine measurement, brain tissue content was obtained via bilateral punches (see above).
Fig. S1Illustration of targeted brain areas, with bregma coordinates (adapted from Paxinos and Watson, 1997)
2 - Supplemental results
Experiment 1
Behavior in the RGT
Table S1 Analysis of the rats’ behavior during the 5 first min of the first RGT. The number of visits (nose-pokes) of each hole is represented; holes A and B being disadvantageous and holes C and D being advantageous (see Figure 1).The total number of visits and the percentage of visits in the advantageous holes C and D are also represented.
Monoamine tissue contents
Table S2a Detailed DOPAC, DA, 5HIAA and 5HT brain tissue content (in ng/mg of tissue) as well as utilization ratio (turnover) within the prefrontal cortex. Because of technical problems, 5HT and metabolites in OFC were measured only in a few samples. DA and metabolite levels in the OFC were negligible (data not shown). *p<.05 different from all the other groups, #p<.05, ##p<.01 different from SLOW GD group
Table S2b Detailed DOPAC, DA, 5HIAA and 5HT brain tissue content (in ng/mg ± SEM) of tissue) as well as utilization ratio (turnover ± SEM) within the subcortical brain areas. *p<.05 different from all the other groups, #p<.05, ##p<.01 different from SLOW GD group
Experiment 2
Behavior in the RGT
Table S3Analysis of the rats’ behavior during the 5 first min of the first RGT. The number of visits (nose-pokes) of each hole is represented; holes A and B being disadvantageous and holes C and D being advantageous (see Figure 1).The total number of visits and the percentage of visits in the advantageous holes C and D are also represented. DM: decision making group, EXPL: exploitation group, GD: good decision makers (SLOW and FAST), PD: poor decision makers
RGT scores of the control group
Fig. S2Scoresof the control group during the first and the second session of the RGT. Control group consisted of good decision-makers (CONTGD, n=5) and poor decision-makers (CONT PD, n=3).During the second RGT session, all rats keep on choosing their preferred options. Comparisons with chance level (dotted line, 50%), t test, *** p<.001; ** p<.01; * p<.05
Detailed results of Fos expression
Table S4Number of Fos-positive nuclei (per mm2± SEM) for good and poor decision makers (GD and PD) during exploitation. No statistical difference was observed between groups (Student’t test, ns)
Table S5Levene's test for homogeneity of Variance accross the 4 experimental groups.Homogeneity of variance was compared between SLOW, FAST GOOD decision-makers, Poor decision-makers (PD), basal and control groups. Variance differed significantly between groups only in the dorsolateral striatum (DLS), for which variance was much higher in SLOW GD than in the other groups.
Table S6 Number of Fos-positive nuclei (per mm2± SEM) for slow and fast good decision makers (SLOW and FAST GD), poor decision makers (PD), the control (CONT) and the basal groups. LSD Fisher after significant factorial ANOVA: #p<.05:FAST different from SLOW; * p<0.05: PD different from SLOW; ** p<0.05, PD different from FAST and SLOW. In grey, values significantly different from control (LSD Fisher, p<0.05)
Fig. S3 Quantification of Fosimmunoreactivity in brain areas for each group: slow and fast good decision-makers (Slow GD, Fast GD) and poor decision-makers (PD) and exploitation groups. Bars represent the mean of Fos-positive neurons per mm2± SEM. The most relevant differences within groups, and specific of a group, in the pattern of Fos activation are represented: (one-way ANOVAs with repeated measures, followed by post-hocTuckey’s test: *, p<0.05).
1