Translational approaches to the neurobiological study of conditional discrimination and inhibition: Implications for psychiatric disease.

There is a growing number of studies investigating discriminatory fear conditioning and conditioned inhibition of fear to assess safety learning, in addition to extinction of cued fear. Despite all of these paradigms resulting in a reduction in fear expression, there are nuanced differences among them, which could be mediated through distinct behavioral and neural mechanisms. These differences could impact how we approach potential treatment options in clinical disorders with dysregulated fear responses. The objective of this review is to give an overview of the conditional discrimination and inhibition findings reported in both animal models and human neuropsychiatric disorders. Both behavioral and neural findings are reviewed among human and rodent studies that include conditional fear discrimination via conditional stimuli with and without reinforcement (CS+ vs. CS-, respectively) and/or conditional inhibition of fear through assessment of the fear response to a compound CS-/CS+ cue versus CS+. There are several parallels across species in behavioral fear expression as well as neural circuits promoting fear reduction in response to a CS- and/or CS-/CS+ compound cue. Continued and increased efforts to compare similar behavioral fear inhibition paradigms across species are needed to make breakthrough advances in our understanding and treatment approaches to individuals with fear disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Suppressing fear in the presence of a safety cue requires infralimbic cortical signaling to central amygdala.

Stressful events can have lasting and impactful effects on behavior, especially by disrupting normal regulation of fear and reward processing. Accurate discrimination among environmental cues predicting threat, safety or reward adaptively guides behavior. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) represents a condition in which maladaptive fear persists in response to explicit safety-predictive cues that coincide with previously learned threat cues, but without threat being present. Since both the infralimbic cortex (IL) and amygdala have each been shown to be important for fear regulation to safety cues, we tested the necessity of specific IL projections to the basolateral amygdala (BLA) or central amygdala (CeA) during safety recall. Male Long Evans rats were used since prior work showed female Long Evans rats did not acquire the safety discrimination task used in this study. Here, we show the infralimbic projection to the central amygdala was necessary for suppressing fear cue-induced freezing in the presence of a learned safety cue, and the projection to the basolateral amygdala was not. The loss of discriminative fear regulation seen specifically during IL->CeA inhibition is similar to the behavioral disruption seen in PTSD individuals that fail to regulate fear in the presence of a safety cue.

Conditioned inhibition of fear and reward in male and female rats.

Stimuli in our environment are not always associated with an outcome. Some of these stimuli, depending on how they are presented, may gain inhibitory value or simply be ignored. If experienced in the presence of other cues predictive of appetitive or aversive outcomes, they typically gain inhibitory value and become predictive cues indicating the absence of appetitive or aversive outcomes. In this case, these cues are referred to as conditioned inhibitors. Here, male and female Long Evans rats underwent cue discrimination training where a reward cue was paired with sucrose, a fear cue with footshock, and an inhibitor cue resulted in neither sucrose or footshock. During a subsequent summation test for conditioned inhibition of fear and reward, the inhibitor cue was presented concurrently with the reward and fear cues without any outcome, intermixed with trials of reinforced reward and fear trials. Males showed significant conditioned inhibition of freezing, while females did not, which was not dependent on estrous. Both males and females showed significant conditioned inhibition of reward. During a retardation of fear acquisition test, the inhibitor was paired with footshock and both males and females showed delayed acquisition of fear. During a retardation of reward acquisition test, the inhibitor was paired with sucrose, and females showed delayed acquisition of reward, while males did not. In summary, males and females showed significant reward-fear-inhibitor cue discrimination, conditioned inhibition of reward, and retardation of fear acquisition. The main sex difference, which was not estrous-dependent, was the lack of conditioned inhibition of freezing in females. These data imply that while the inhibitor cue gained some inhibitory value in the females, the strength of this inhibitory value may not have been great enough to effectively downregulate freezing elicited by the fear cue.

Psychological and physiological correlates of stimulus discrimination in adults.

The discrimination of cues in the environment that signal danger ("fear cue") is important for survival but depends critically on the discernment of such cues from ones that pose no threat ("safety cues"). In rodents, we previously demonstrated the underlying neurobiological mechanisms that support fear versus safety discrimination and documented that these mechanisms extend to the discrimination of reward as well. While learning about reward is equally important for survival, it remains an under-studied area of research, particularly in human studies of conditional discrimination. In the present study, we translated our rodent task of fear reward and neutral discrimination (fear, reward, and neutral discrimination [FRND]) for use in humans. Undergraduate students (N = 53) completed the FRND while electrodermal activity was recorded. Skin conductance response (SCR) amplitude, a marker of arousal response, was derived for fear, reward, and neutral cues that signaled no outcome; critical trials assessed conditional discrimination using combined fear + neutral and reward + neutral cues. Participants provided likeability ratings for each cue type. Results demonstrated that participants rated reward cues the best, fear cues the worst, and neutral cues in between, while SCR amplitude was largest for fear and reward cues and lowest for neutral cues. SCR amplitudes were reduced for fear + neutral (compared to fear) and reward + neutral cues (compared to reward). Results demonstrate that the FRND is a useful paradigm for the assessment of psychological and physiological discrimination of fear and reward. Implications and directions for future work are discussed.

Encoding of conditioned inhibitors of fear in the infralimbic cortex.

Cues in the environment signaling the absence of threat, i.e. safety, can influence both fear and reward-seeking behaviors. Heightened and maladaptive fear is associated with reduced activity in the medial prefrontal cortex. We have previously shown in male rats that the infralimbic (IL) prefrontal cortex is necessary for suppressing fear during a safety cue. The objective of the present study was to determine if there was safety cue-specific neural activity within the IL using a Pavlovian conditioning paradigm, where a fear cue was paired with shock, a safety cue was paired with no shock, and a reward cue was paired with sucrose. To investigate how safety cues can suppress fear, the fear and safety cues were presented together as a compound fear + safety cue. Single-unit activity showed a large proportion of neurons with excitatory responses to the fear + safety cue specifically, a separate group of neurons with excitatory responses to both the reward and fear + safety cues, and bidirectional neurons with excitation to the fear + safety cue and inhibition to the fear cue. Neural activity was also found to be negatively correlated with freezing during the fear + safety cue. Together, these data implicate the IL in encoding specific aspects of conditioned inhibitors when fear is being actively suppressed.

Interaction of stress and alcohol on discriminating fear from safety and reward in male and female rats.

RATIONALE: Stressful events can have lasting and impactful effects on behavior, especially in terms of appropriate fear regulation and reward seeking. Our prior work in rats has shown baseline sex differences in fear expression and sucrose seeking in a discriminative reward-fear-safety conditioning task. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the current study were to determine how prior stress may affect alcohol consumption across a reward-fear-safety learning task, and how prior alcohol history may interact with stress to impact learning in this task. METHODS: Male and female Long Evans rats were given home cage intermittent 24 h access to both water and alcohol for 5 weeks. A subset of rats then received exposure to stress (15 unsignaled footshocks), while remaining unstressed rats received context exposure without shock. One week later, all rats were trained on the same reward-fear-safety cue task while having continuous home cage access to both water and alcohol. RESULTS: All rats increased consumption (g/kg/24 h) across the 5 weeks of intermittent access, with females showing higher consumption levels. Stress exposure did not alter alcohol consumption in the week following stress, but did increase home cage alcohol consumption during later reward-fear-safety cue learning. Stress in both sexes also elevated freezing levels to the reward cue resulting in decreased sucrose seeking and was positively correlated with home cage alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS: While stress increased drinking in both males and females, the effects of stress were particularly pronounced in females, indicating our results could be capturing a higher propensity for females to display stress-induced drinking.

Elevated dopamine in the amygdala disrupts infant's approach to mother: Implications for development of neurotypical social behaviors and networks.

In this issue of Neuron, Opendak et al. (2021) use a suite of techniques that are typically challenging in infant rat pups to examine the role of dopaminergic input to the basolateral amygdala in social behavior deficits in response to early-life adversity.

Environmental certainty influences the neural systems regulating responses to threat and stress.

Flexible calibration of threat responding in accordance with the environment is an adaptive process that allows an animal to avoid harm while also maintaining engagement of other goal-directed actions. This calibration process, referred to as threat response regulation, requires an animal to calculate the probability that a given encounter will result in a threat so they can respond accordingly. Here we review the neural correlates of two highly studied forms of threat response suppression: extinction and safety conditioning. We focus on how relative levels of certainty or uncertainty in the surrounding environment alter the acquisition and application of these processes. We also discuss evidence indicating altered threat response regulation following stress exposure, including enhanced fear conditioning, and disrupted extinction and safety conditioning. To conclude, we discuss research using an animal model of coping that examines the impact of stressor controllability on threat responding, highlighting the potential for previous experiences with control, or other forms of coping, to protect against the effects of future adversity.

On the basis of sex: Differences in safety discrimination vs. conditioned inhibition.

Inaccurate discrimination between threat and safety cues is a common symptom of anxiety disorders such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Although females experience higher rates of these disorders than males, the body of literature examining sex differences in safety learning is still growing. Learning to discriminate safety cues from threat cues requires downregulating fear to the safety cue while continuing to express fear to the threat cue. However, successful discrimination between safety and threat cues does not necessarily guarantee that the safety cue can effectively reduce fear to the threat cue when they are presented together. The conditioned inhibitory ability of a safety cue to reduce fear in the presence of both safety and threat is most likely dependent on the ability to discriminate between the two. There are relatively few studies exploring conditioned inhibition as a method of safety learning. Adding to this knowledge gap is the general lack of inclusion of female subjects within these studies. In this review, we provide a qualitative review of our current knowledge of sex differences in safety discrimination versus conditioned inhibition in both humans and rodents. Overall, the literature suggests that while females and males perform similarly in discrimination learning, females show deficits in conditioned inhibition compared to males. Furthermore, while estrogen appears to have a protective effect on safety learning in humans, increased estrogen in female rodents appears to be correlated with impaired safety learning performance.

Juvenile stress facilitates safety learning in male and female high alcohol preferring mice.

Adversities during juvenility increase the risk for stress-related disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcohol use disorder. However, stress can also induce coping mechanisms beneficial for later stressful experiences. We reported previously that mice selectively bred for high alcohol preference (HAP) exposed to stress during adolescence (but not during adulthood) showed enhanced fear-conditioned responses in adulthood, as measured by fear-potentiated startle (FPS). However, HAP mice also showed enhanced responding to safety cues predicting the absence of foot shocks in adulthood. Here, we pursue these findings in HAP mice by investigating in further detail how juvenile stress impacts the acquisition of safety and fear learning. HAP mice were subjected to three days of juvenile stress (postnatal days 25, 27, 28) and discriminative safety/fear conditioning in adulthood. FPS was used to assess safety versus fear cue discrimination, fear learning, and fear inhibition by the safety cue. Both stressed and unstressed HAP mice were able to discriminate between both cues as well as learn the fear cue-shock association. Interestingly, it was only the previously stressed mice that were able to inhibit their fear response when the fear cue was co-presented with the safety cue, thus demonstrating safety learning. We also report an incidental finding of alopecia in the juvenile stress groups, a phenotype seen in stress-related disorders. These results in HAP mice may be relevant to understanding the influence of juvenile trauma for individual risk and resilience toward developing PTSD and how individuals might benefit from safety cues in behavioral psychotherapy.

Differential effects of prior stress on conditioned inhibition of fear and fear extinction.

Resistant and generalized fear are hallmark symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Given PTSD is highly comorbid with addiction disorders indicates a maladaptive interaction between fear and reward circuits. To investigate learning processes underlying fear, reward and safety, we trained male rats to discriminate among a fear cue paired with footshock, a reward cue paired with sucrose and an explicit safety cue co-occurring with the fear cue in which no footshocks were delivered. In an attempt to emulate aspects of PTSD, we pre-exposed male rats to a stressor (15 unsignaled footshocks) before training them to fear, reward and safety cues, and subsequent fear and reward extinction. Prior stress did not produce any significant impairments on conditioned inhibition to a safety cue compared to non-stressed controls. However, in subsequent fear extinction, prior stress profoundly impaired fear reduction to an extinguished fear cue. Prior stress also significantly reduced reward seeking to a reward-associated cue throughout training. Together, our data show that prior stress did not affect conditioned inhibition of fear to the same extent as impairing fear extinction. These results have interesting implications on how safety circuits are organized and impacted by stress, leading to possibly new avenues of research on mechanisms of stress disorders, such as PTSD.

Know safety, no fear.

Every day we are bombarded by stimuli that must be assessed for their potential for harm or benefit. Once a stimulus is learned to predict harm, it can elicit fear responses. Such learning can last a lifetime but is not always beneficial for an organism. For an organism to thrive in its environment, it must know when to engage in defensive, avoidance behaviors and when to engage in non-defensive, approach behaviors. Fear should be suppressed in situations that are not dangerous: when a novel, innocuous stimulus resembles a feared stimulus, when a feared stimulus no longer predicts harm, or when there is an option to avoid harm. A cardinal feature of anxiety disorders is the inability to suppress fear adaptively. In PTSD, for instance, learned fear is expressed inappropriately in safe situations and is resistant to extinction. In this review, we discuss mechanisms of suppressing fear responses during stimulus discrimination, fear extinction, and active avoidance, focusing on the well-studied tripartite circuit consisting of the amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex and hippocampus.

Sex differences in fear regulation and reward-seeking behaviors in a fear-safety-reward discrimination task.

Reward availability and the potential for danger or safety potently regulate emotion. Despite women being more likely than men to develop emotion dysregulation disorders, there are comparatively few studies investigating fear, safety and reward regulation in females. Here, we show that female Long Evans rats did not suppress conditioned freezing in the presence of a safety cue, nor did they extinguish their freezing response, whereas males did both. Females were also more reward responsive during the reward cue until the first footshock exposure, at which point there were no sex differences in reward seeking to the reward cue. Darting analyses suggest females were able to regulate this behavior in response to the safety cue, suggesting they were able to discriminate between fear and safety cues but did not demonstrate this with conditioned suppression of freezing behavior. However, levels of darting in this study were too low to make any definitive conclusions. In summary, females showed a significantly different behavioral profile than males in a task that tested the ability to discriminate among fear, safety and reward cues. This paradigm offers a great opportunity to test for mechanisms that are generating these behavioral sex differences in learned safety and reward seeking.

Adolescent conditioning affects rate of adult fear, safety and reward learning during discriminative conditioning.

Fear and reward memories formed in adulthood are influenced by prior experiences. Experiences that occur during sensitive periods, such as adolescence, can have an especially high impact on later learning. Fear and reward memories form when aversive or appetitive events co-occur with initially neutral stimuli, that then gain negative or positive emotional load. Fear and reward seeking behaviours are influenced by safety cues, signalling the non-occurrence of a threat. It is unclear how adolescent fear or reward pre-conditioning influences later dynamics of these conditioned emotions, and conditioned safety. In this study, we presented male rats with adolescent fear or reward pre-conditioning, followed by discriminative conditioning in adulthood. In this discriminative task, rats are simultaneously conditioned to reward, fear and safety cues. We show that adolescent reward pre-conditioning did not affect the rate of adult reward conditioning, but instead accelerated adult safety conditioning. Adolescent fear pre-conditioning accelerated adult fear and reward seeking behaviours but delayed adult safety expression. Together, our results suggest that the dynamics of safety conditioning can be influenced by adolescent priming of different valences. Taking adolescent experiences into consideration can have implications on how we approach therapy options for later learned fear disorders where safety learning is compromised.

Altering D1 receptor activity in the basolateral amygdala impairs fear suppression during a safety cue.

Accurate discrimination among cues signifying reward, danger or safety initiates the proper emotional response in order to guide behavior. Appropriate conditioned inhibition of fear in the presence of a safety cue would allow an organism to engage in reward seeking behaviors. There is currently little known about the mechanisms of reward, fear and safety cue discrimination and how a safety cue can inhibit fear and release reward seeking from inhibition. Here we assess reward, fear and safety cue learning together using a behavioral paradigm that has identified neurons that discriminate among these cues in the basolateral amygdala (BLA) (Sangha, Chadick, & Janak, 2013). Dopamine signaling in the BLA has been implicated in discriminatory reward learning, learned fear responses and fear extinction. We tested the hypothesis that D1 receptor activity will influence reward-fear-safety cue discrimination by using the D1 receptor agonist, SKF-3839, and antagonist, SCH-23390, either systemically or within the BLA during discrimination learning in male Long Evans rats. We show that both the agonist and antagonist interfered with fear suppression in the presence of the safety cue, when administered systemically or when infused directly into the BLA. This indicates that altering D1 receptor activity in the basolateral amygdala impairs fear suppression during a safety cue. Neither the agonist or antagonist had a consistent negative impact on discriminatory reward seeking when infused into the BLA. However, systemic administration of the D1 receptor agonist did reduce reward seeking behavior during a task that included fear and safety cues. We did not observe a negative impact on reward seeking during systemic administration of a D1 receptor agonist in a task that only included reward cue + sucrose and nonreward cue + no sucrose pairings. This indicates the impairments we saw with the systemically applied agonist in the safety-fear-reward cue discrimination task were more likely due to effects on fear and/or motivation rather than on cue discrimination. Together, our data indicate that altered dopamine D1 receptor activity in the BLA may be a potential mechanism that leads to the impairment in fear suppression to the safety signal seen with PTSD patients.

Plasticity of Fear and Safety Neurons of the Amygdala in Response to Fear Extinction.

Fear inhibition learning induces plasticity and remodeling of circuits within the amygdala. Most studies examine these changes in nondiscriminative fear conditioning paradigms. Using a discriminative fear, safety, and reward conditioning task, Sangha et al. (2013) have previously reported several neural microcircuits within the basal amygdala (BA) which discriminate among these cues, including a subpopulation of neurons responding selectively to a safety cue and not a fear cue. Here, the hypothesis that these "safety" neurons isolated during discriminative conditioning are biased to become fear cue responsive as a result of extinction, when fear behavior diminishes, was tested. Although 41% of "safety" neurons became fear cue responsive as a result of extinction, the data revealed that there was no bias for these neurons to become preferentially responsive during fear extinction compared to the other identified subgroups. In addition to the plasticity seen in the "safety" neurons, 44% of neurons unresponsive to either the fear cue or safety cue during discriminative conditioning became fear cue responsive during extinction. Together these emergent responses to the fear cue as a result of extinction support the hypothesis that new learning underlies extinction. In contrast, 47% of neurons responsive to the fear cue during discriminative conditioning became unresponsive to the fear cue during extinction. These findings are consistent with a suppression of neural responding mediated by inhibitory learning, or, potentially, by direct unlearning. Together, the data support extinction as an active process involving both gains and losses of responses to the fear cue and suggests the final output of the integrated BA circuit in influencing fear behavior is a balance of excitation and inhibition, and perhaps reversal of learning-induced changes.

Heightened fear in response to a safety cue and extinguished fear cue in a rat model of maternal immune activation.

Maternal immune activation (MIA) during pregnancy is an environmental risk factor for psychiatric illnesses such as schizophrenia and autism in the offspring. Hence, changes in an array of behaviors, including behavioral flexibility, consistent with altered functioning of cortico-limbic circuits have been reported in rodent models of MIA. Surprisingly, previous studies have not examined the effect of MIA on the extinction of fear conditioning which depends on cortico-limbic circuits. Thus, we tested the effects of treating pregnant Long Evans rats with the viral mimetic polyI:C (gestational day 15; 4 mg/kg; i.v.) on fear conditioning and extinction in the male offspring using two different tasks. In the first experiment, we observed no effect of polyI:C treatment on the acquisition or extinction of a classically conditioned fear memory in a non-discriminative auditory cue paradigm. However, polyI:C-treated offspring did increase contextual freezing during the recall of fear extinction in this non-discriminative paradigm. The second experiment utilized a recently developed task to explicitly test the ability of rats to discriminate among cues signifying fear, reward, and safety; a task that requires behavioral flexibility. To our surprise, polyI:C-treated rats acquired the task in a manner similar to saline-treated rats. However, upon subsequent extinction training, they showed significantly faster extinction of the freezing response to the fear cue. In contrast, during the extinction recall test, polyI:C-treated offspring showed enhanced freezing behavior before and after presentation of the fear cue, suggesting an impairment in their ability to regulate fear behavior. These behavioral results are integrated into the literature suggesting impairments in cortico-limbic brain function in the offspring of rats treated with polyI:C during pregnancy.

Alterations in reward, fear and safety cue discrimination after inactivation of the rat prelimbic and infralimbic cortices.

Accurate discrimination of environmental cues predicting reward, fear, or safety is important for survival. The prelimbic and infralimbic cortices are implicated in regulating reward-seeking and fear behaviors; however, no studies have examined their roles in discriminating among reward, fear, and safety cues. Using a discriminative conditioning task that includes presentations of a reward cue (paired with a reward pellet), fear cue (paired with footshock), and a compound fear+safety cue (no footshock) within the same sessions allowed us to assess the flexibility and precision of fear and reward-seeking behaviors to these cues. We found that fear behavior was appropriately limited to the fear cue in untreated rats, but during infralimbic cortical inactivation, similar levels of fear were seen to the fear and compound fear+safety cues. Reward-seeking behavior was also appropriately limited to the reward cue in untreated rats. Inactivating the prelimbic cortex altered discriminative reward seeking as rats with prelimbic inactivation did not increase their reward seeking behavior during the reward cue to the same degree as saline controls. Our results imply dissociable roles of the two cortical regions: the prelimbic cortex in precise discriminative reward seeking and the infralimbic cortex in discriminating between fear and safety cues. These data suggest that alterations in the balance of activity between areas homologous to the prelimbic and infralimbic cortices may be involved in the processes that go awry in anxiety and addiction disorders.

Safety encoding in the basal amygdala.

Learning to fear and avoid life-threatening stimuli are critical survival skills but are maladaptive when they persist in the absence of a direct threat. Thus, it is important to detect when a situation is safe and to increase behaviors leading to naturally rewarding actions, such as feeding and mating. It is unclear how the brain distinguishes between dangerous and safe situations. Here, we present a novel protocol designed to investigate the processing of cues that predict danger, safety, or reward (sucrose). In vivo single unit recordings were obtained in the basal amygdala of freely behaving rats undergoing simultaneous reward, fear, and safety conditioning. We observed a population of neurons that did not respond to a Fear Cue but did change their firing rate during the combined presentation of a fear cue simultaneous with a second, safety, cue; this combination of Fear + Safety Cues signified "no shock." This neural population consisted of two subpopulations: neurons that responded to the Fear + Safety Cue but not the Fear or Reward Cue ("safety" neurons), and neurons that responded to the Fear + Safety and Reward Cue but not the Fear Cue ("safety + reward" neurons). These data demonstrate the presence of neurons in the basal amygdala that are selectively responsive to Safety Cues. Furthermore, these data suggest that safety and reward learning use overlapping mechanisms in the basal amygdala.

Inhibition of fear by learned safety signals: a mini-symposium review.

Safety signals are learned cues that predict the nonoccurrence of an aversive event. As such, safety signals are potent inhibitors of fear and stress responses. Investigations of safety signal learning have increased over the last few years due in part to the finding that traumatized persons are unable to use safety cues to inhibit fear, making it a clinically relevant phenotype. The goal of this review is to present recent advances relating to the neural and behavioral mechanisms of safety learning, and expression in rodents, nonhuman primates, and humans.