Search

Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) is a complex and widespread disease with limited pharmacotherapies. Preclinical animal models of AUD use a variety of voluntary alcohol consumption procedures to recapitulate different phases of AUD including binge alcohol consumption and dependence. However, voluntary alcohol consumption in mice is widely variable rendering it difficult to reproduce results across labs. Accumulating evidence indicates that different brands of commercially available rodent chow can profoundly influence alcohol intake. In this study, we investigated the effects of three commercially available and widely used rodent diet formulations on alcohol consumption and preference in C57BL/6J mice using the 24h intermittent access procedure. The three brands of chow tested were LabDiet 5001 (LD 5001), LabDiet 5053 (LD 5053), and Teklad 2019S (TL2019S) from two companies (Research Diets and Envigo respectively). Mice fed LD5001 displayed the highest levels of alcohol consumption and preference followed by LD5053 and TL2019S. We also found that alcohol consumption and preference could be rapidly switched by changing the diet 48h prior to alcohol administration. Sucrose, saccharin, and quinine preference were not altered suggesting that the diets did not alter taste perception. We also found that mice fed LD5001 displayed increased quinine-resistant alcohol intake compared to mice fed TL2019S, suggesting that diets could influence the development of "compulsive" like alcohol consumption. We profiled the gut microbiome of water and alcohol drinking mice that were maintained on different diets and found significant differences in bacterial alpha and beta diversity, which could impact gut-brain axis signaling and alcohol consumption.

To survive, animals must meet their biological needs while simultaneously avoiding danger. However, the neurobiological basis of appetitive and aversive survival behaviors has historically been studied using separate behavioral tasks. While recent studies in mice have quantified appetitive and aversive conditioned responses simultaneously (Heinz et al., 2017; Jikomes et al., 2016), these tasks required different behavioral responses to each stimulus. As many brain regions involved in survival behavior process stimuli of opposite valence, we developed a paradigm in which mice perform the same response (nosepoke) to distinct auditory cues to obtain a rewarding outcome (palatable food) or avoid an aversive outcome (mild footshoock). This design allows for both within- and between-subject comparisons as animals respond to appetitive and aversive cues. The central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) is implicated in the regulation of responses to stimuli of either valence. Considering its role in threat processing (Haubensak et al., 2010; Wilensky et al., 2006) and regulation of incentive salience (Warlow and Berridge, 2021), it is important to examine the contribution of the CeA to mechanisms potentially underlying comorbid dysregulation of avoidance and reward (Bolton et al., 2009; Sinha, 2008). Using this paradigm, we tested the role of two molecularly defined CeA subtypes previously linked to consummatory and defensive behaviors. Significant strain differences in the acquisition and performance of the task were observed. Bidirectional chemogenetic manipulation of CeA somatostatin (SOM) neurons altered motivation for reward and perseveration of reward-seeking responses on avoidance trials. Manipulation of corticotropin-releasing factor neurons (CRF) had no significant effect on food reward consumption, motivation, or task performance. This paradigm will facilitate investigations into the neuronal mechanisms controlling motivated behavior across valences., Significance Statement: It is unclear how different neuronal populations contribute to reward- and aversion-driven behaviors within a subject. To address this question, we developed a novel behavioral paradigm in which mice obtain food and avoid footshocks via the same operant response. We then use this paradigm to test how the central amygdala coordinates appetitive and aversive behavioral responses. By testing somatostatin-IRES-Cre and CRF-IRES-Cre transgenic lines, we found significant differences between strains on task acquisition and performance. Using chemogenetics, we demonstrate that CeA SOM+ neurons regulate motivation for reward, while manipulation of CeA CRF+ neurons had no effect on task performance. Future studies investigating the interaction between positive and negative motivation circuits should benefit from the use of this dual valence paradigm.