Proefschrift_Holstein

Chapter 6

M2

M1

M2

M1

Cg1

Cg1

S1FL

S1FL

S1DZ

cg

S1DZ

cg

Cg2

Cg2

S1J

S1J

S1DZO

S1DZO

ec

ec

E

E

gcc

S1ULp Bregma +1.68 mm

gcc

LV

S1ULp

LV

LSD

LSD

CPu

CPu

LSV

LSV

DCl

GI

DCl

GI

DI

VCl

DI

VCl

AID

AcbC

AID

AcbC

AIV

aca

AIV

DEn

AcbSh

aca

DEn

AcbSh

rf

ICj

LSS

IEn

ICj

3

LSS

IEn

LAcbSh

2

LAcbSh

VP

Pir1

Pir1

VP

VP

VP

lo

VP

lo

acer

VP

ICj

acer

ICj

Tu1 2 3

Tu1

Bregma +1.56 mm

Bregma +1.44 mm

Bregma +1.32 mm

M2

M1

Cg1

S1FL

S1DZ

cg

Cg2

Bregma 1.68mm ec S1ULp E S1DZO S1J

cc

LV

LSD

LSD

SHi

SHi

CPu

CPu

LSI

GI Bregma +1.20 mm S2

LSI

S2

Ld

LSV

Ld

LSV

DCl

GI

DCl

DI

MS

VCl

DI

MS

VCl

ICjM

ICjM

AID

AID

aca

aca

DEn

AIV

AcbSh

DEn

AIV

AcbSh

LSS

AcbC

LSS

AcbC

IEn

Pir1 2 3

IEn

Pir1 2 3

LAcbSh

VDB

LAcbSh

VDB

VP ICj

VP ICj

acer

lo

ICj

acer

lo

ICj

2 3

Tu1 2 3

Figure 6.3 Lesion placement showing the extent (left) and peak (right) of the lesion as veri- fied using Nissl staining for the nucleus accumbens core Shading indicates the extent (left) or peak (right) of the lesion of each subject. The extent is represented as the stacked layers across subjects. (dependent on the task cue) in the high reward context relative to the low reward context ( figure 6.2 ). This was evidenced by a significant reward x task switching interaction (F(1,23) = 11.395, p = 0.003, η2 = 0.331, figure 6.2 ). Breaking down this interaction revealed that the switch cost in the low reward context, i.e. a numerically higher accuracy on repeat than switch trials (F(1,23) = 3.188, p = 0.087, η2 = 0.122, figure 6.2 ), reversed into a switch benefit in the high reward condition (F(1,23) = 7.411, p = 0.012, η2 = 0.244; figure 6.2 ).

128