Skip to main content

Week 5, Allsop et al. & Sial et al. Observational Learning

By

This week the two papers, first by Sial et al. and second by Allsop et al. studied two different paradigms and different hypothesis however they utilized certain paradigms to achieve the same underlying effect of observational learning and the ability for us to observe that in rodent models. Right off the bat, I was quite overwhelmed with the amount of manipulation that went into the paradigm discussed in the Allsop et al. paper as compared to Sial et al.

Allsop et al. used a variety of test and control groups to develop a paradigm to study the projections and nuclei that may be involved in observational fear learning. Sial et al. however, used a much more simplified chronic social defeat stress paradigm (CSDS), one that has been seen many times before in our previous articles, along with a witness component to factor in the ‘observational’ aspect (VSDS)

I have been thinking a lot about ethological validity lately in terms of how a laboratory setting could affect the natural and endogenous behaviors of organisms. Ethological validity is a major confounding variable that most paradigms try to account for. Sial et al. seem to have developed a novel method, the VSDS that not only uses a tried and tested model to induce anxiety in mice but to also account for things such as “emotional stress” in an animal model. This method to me seemed most valid in terms of models for observational learning and well as PTSD. I had a few qualms with the paradigm chosen by Allsop et al. Firstly, they had no data to support the idea that an organism can learn through observation without ever having experienced the stimulus or situation themselves and this is seen in their data as NO (naive observer) group that had never experienced cue-shock pairings did not change behavior after viewing a demonstrator attain a cue paired shock. This is in direct contrast to their opening statement saying “observational learning. Individuals (can) learn without directly experiencing the pairing or predictive cue and punishment.” Their paradigm is focused on a classical conditioning response which in my opinion lacks ethological validity and with the bulk of behavior being a result of classical conditioning and not pure observational learning. It is too highly manipulated, and although it does provide a model in which former experience can lead to recall due to observation, it does not seem as robust as the data shown by Sial et al. where it was quite clear that emotionally stressed mice were displaying similar behaviors in stress tests to physically stressed mice. This model very succinctly showed that observation alone can induce a change in behavior as seen not only by their cortisone changes but as well as a social interaction test and elevated plus maze. 

Allsop et al, however, did take it one step further, a step I would have liked to see done by Sial et al., they used optogenetics to then study the neuronal projections from the anterior cingulate cortex to the basolateral amygdala, I would have much rather liked to have seen these optogenetic studies done using the VSDS paradigm which, to me, seemed a much better model for PTSD as well as observational learning. I would like to see if the projections activate in the same way and the ACC and BLA nuclei are necessary components of acquisition for fear learning. If this pattern of activation was conserved in the VSDS model, it would provide a concrete argument for the functionality of these projections and further validate the use of the VSDS model created by Sial et al. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 2- Dopamine Modulation of Depressive-like Behaviors

By
The Chaudhury et al paper explored the neural circuit mechanisms involved in the dopamine modulation of certain symptoms of depression. In this study, the researchers looked at social interaction and sucrose preference as part of their social-defeat paradigm, which has been shown in the past to be indicative of depressive-like behaviors. Although I initially did not completely see the connection between the social-defeat stress model of depression and the tonic vs phasic firing of dopamine neurons, it seemed that susceptibility and resilience to stress played a role in the functional/behavioral effects of dopamine firing. It was interesting to see how chronic mild stress with phasic firing of VTA dopamine neurons converted even resilient mice into susceptible mice.  The Tye et al paper similarly looked at the dopamine modulation of depressive-like behaviors, focusing on motivation with the forced swim tests and open field tests, followed by measurement of anhedonia by quantifyi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sial & Allsop

By
Sial et al. derived a novel approach for studying what they deem vicarious defeat stress (VSDS) as a model for MDD, PTSD, and other mood-related disorders as an alternative to the classical CSDS paradigm. Using adult male mice, they demonstrate that their model induces a robust and measurable social avoidant phenotype as well as other stress and anxiety related behavioral outputs. Their subsequent rescue study with chronic fluoxetine treatment shows reversal of the behavioral phenotypes and emphasizes the predictive validity of the model. Allsop et al. found that BLA-projecting ACC neurons preferentially encode socially derived aversive cue information by encoding the demonstrator’s distress response during observational learning, hence enabling acquisition of negative valence of cue by BLA neurons and behavioral output. In order to test their hypothesis, Allsop et al. used an observational fear conditional paradigm to create association between a conditioned stimulu...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington and Reber

By
Buffington et al. explore a mechanism by which maternal obesity can induce neuronal and subsequent behavioral disorders. Using a model of high-fat diet (MHFD)-induced obesity, the authors showcase the strong connection between the brain and the gut, and its impact on behavior. The findings are provocative; by exposing these offspring to the microbiome of control offspring, there was evidence of a rescued observed behavioral phenotype. Furthermore, a phylogenetic profiling of the gut microbiome revealed a decrease in L. reuteri within MHFD offspring, and introduction of live L. reuteri into the drinking water shows successful rescue of the behavioral issues in the MHFD offspring. L. reuteri-induced expression of oxytocin within the paraventricular nuclei of the hypothalamus provides a potential mechanistic explanation for the behavioral changes. I thought this paper provided robust support for the hypothesized interaction between the gut biome and the developing CNS, with tremendous po...
Post a Comment
Read more