A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Nature Neuroscience
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Brief CommuniCation
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-0693-8
1Centre for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2St Vincent’s Centre for
Applied Medical Research, St Vincent’s Health Network, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3Decision Neuroscience Laboratory, School of Psychology,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
5These authors contributed equally: Laura A. Bradfield, Beatrice K. Leung. ✉e-mail: laura.bradfield@uts.edu.au; bernard.balleine@unsw.edu.au
The role of the hippocampus in goal-directed action is cur-
rently unclear; studies investigating this issue have produced
contradictory results. Here we reconcile these contradictions
by demonstrating that, in rats, goal-directed action relies
on the dorsal hippocampus, but only transiently, immedi-
ately after initial acquisition. Furthermore, we found that
goal-directed action also depends transiently on physical con-
text, suggesting a psychological basis for the hippocampal
regulation of goal-directed action control.
Evidence regarding the role of the dorsal hippocampus in
goal-directed action is mixed. Neuroimaging studies conducted in
humans have produced several findings suggesting a central role
for the hippocampus in regulating non-navigational goal-directed
decision-making1,2. Likewise, electrophysiological studies in
rodents have implied a role for the dorsal hippocampus in both
navigational3 and non-navigational goal-directed tasks4. Rodent
lesion studies, on the other hand, have found non-navigational
goal-directed actions to be intact despite comprehensive lesions of
the dorsal hippocampus5,6.
One potentially crucial difference between these studies is the
type and amount of training involved. Studies that have detected
a relationship between hippocampal activity and goal-directed
action involved protocols in which participants were either trained
and tested in a single day1 or trained over several days on tasks that
involved multiple contingency switches that could each be encoded
as a novel event2,4. By contrast, studies that found no role for the
hippocampus in goal-directed action trained animals on stable con-
tingencies over multiple days5,6. We sought, therefore, to investigate
the hypothesis that non-navigational goal-directed actions rely on
the dorsal hippocampus but only during initial learning.
We used outcome devaluation tests7 to determine whether
actions were goal directed (Methods). Rats were trained to press two
levers, each delivering a unique outcome: either pellets or sucrose.
After training, the value of one of these outcomes was reduced using
sensory-specific satiety7, after which the rats were given a choice
between the levers in an extinction test (that is, in the absence of
pellet or sucrose delivery). In such tests, rats typically respond more
on the lever associated with the still-valued (non-prefed) outcome
relative to the devalued lever, demonstrating control by both the
current value of the outcome and the action–outcome association
in accordance with definitions of goal-directed action7,8. Our first
series of experiments (Experiments 1–3) investigated whether dor-
sal hippocampal involvement in goal-directed action depends on
the amount of training. To achieve this, we inactivated the dorsal
hippocampus using either local infusions of the GABAA receptor
antagonist muscimol or chemogenetics.
We first assessed the effect of intradorsal hippocampal infu-
sions of muscimol given either before training (Experiment 1a)
or before testing (Experiment 1b; Methods and Extended Data
Fig. 1a–c). For each experiment, rats were first trained to press
both left (A1) and right (A2) levers for polycose (O3) on days 1–5.
On day 6, the left and right levers earned unique outcomes, either
pellets or sucrose (that is, A1→O1 and A2→O2; counterbalanced;
Fig. 1a). Groups did not differ in lever-press acquisition for polycose
or pellets and sucrose in either experiment (largest F value = 1.99,
P = 0.176; Extended Data Fig. 2a–f). On testing, devaluation was
intact (valued > devalued) for rats that received saline infusions
on day 6 but was impaired in muscimol-infused rats (valued =
devalued, Experiment 1a; Fig. 1b), as demonstrated by a group ×
devaluation interaction (F(1,17) = 6.56, P = 0.02) and a significant
simple effect for group SALINE (F(1,17) = 13.46, P = 0.002) but not
group MUSCIMOL (F < 1). On testing, hippocampal inactivation
(Experiment 1b) again disrupted devaluation relative to saline con-
trols (Fig. 1c), as shown by a significant group × devaluation interac-
tion (F(1,14) = 6.09, P = 0.027) and a simple effect in group SALINE
(F(1,14) = 5.86, P = 0.03) but not in group MUSCIMOL (F < 1).
Experiment 2 (design in Fig. 1d) replicated and extended
Experiment 1b, except we omitted polycose pretraining and used
an inhibitory hM4Di DREADD (designer receptor exclusively
activated by designer drug; based on procedures validated previ-
ously9,10) to inactivate the dorsal hippocampus, thus avoiding the
need for multiple infusions. Experiment 2 also sought to establish
the regional specificity of the effect by comparing animals that
received transfection directed toward the CA1 region of the dorsal
hippocampus with a group in which expression was confined to CA2
(Fig. 1e and Extended Data Fig. 1d,e). Half of the rats in each control
group (hM4Di + Vehicle (Veh) and mCherry + clozapine-N-oxide
(CNO)) received viral transfection in CA1 and half received viral
transfection in CA2.
For this experiment, rats were trained to a criterion of a mini-
mum of 20 outcomes on each lever over 1–2 d and then tested for
devaluation performance the following day (Methods). Vehicle and
CNO injections were administered before the test. Initial lever-press
acquisition and the number of outcomes earned on each lever were
similar for all groups (all F values < 1; Extended Data Fig. 2g,h).
On testing, while devaluation was intact in controls (that is, groups
hM4Di + Veh, mCherr y + CNO and hM4Di CA2 + CNO; valued
> devalued), however, it was impaired in the hM4Di CA1 + CNO
Goal-directed actions transiently depend on
dorsal hippocampus
Laura A. Bradfield 1,2,5 ✉ , Beatrice K. Leung3,5, Susan Boldt4, Sophia Liang3 and
Bernard W. Balleine 3 ✉
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE | VOL 23 | OCTOBER 2020 | 1194–1197 | www.nature.com/natureneuroscience
1194
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved