Schizophrenia copy number variants and associative learning

Large-scale genomic studies have made major progress in identifying genetic risk variants for schizophrenia. A key finding from these studies is that there is an increased burden of genomic copy number variants (CNVs) in schizophrenia cases compared with controls. The mechanism through which these CNVs confer risk for the symptoms of schizophrenia, however, remains unclear. One possibility is that schizophrenia risk CNVs impact basic associative learning processes, abnormalities of which have long been associated with the disorder. To investigate whether genes in schizophrenia CNVs impact on specific phases of associative learning we combined human genetics with experimental gene expression studies in animals. In a sample of 11 917 schizophrenia cases and 16 416 controls, we investigated whether CNVs from patients with schizophrenia are enriched for genes expressed during the consolidation, retrieval or extinction of associative memories. We show that CNVs from cases are enriched for genes expressed during fear extinction in the hippocampus, but not genes expressed following consolidation or retrieval. These results suggest that CNVs act to impair inhibitory learning in schizophrenia, potentially contributing to the development of core symptoms of the disorder

Quantifying Individual Variation in the Propensity to Attribute Incentive Salience to Reward Cues

If reward-associated cues acquire the properties of incentive stimuli they can come to powerfully control behavior, and potentially promote maladaptive behavior. Pavlovian incentive stimuli are defined as stimuli that have three fundamental properties: they are attractive, they are themselves desired, and they can spur instrumental actions. We have found, however, that there is considerable individual variation in the extent to which animals attribute Pavlovian incentive motivational properties (“incentive salience”) to reward cues. The purpose of this paper was to develop criteria for identifying and classifying individuals based on their propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues. To do this, we conducted a meta-analysis of a large sample of rats (N = 1,878) subjected to a classic Pavlovian conditioning procedure. We then used the propensity of animals to approach a cue predictive of reward (one index of the extent to which the cue was attributed with incentive salience), to characterize two behavioral phenotypes in this population: animals that approached the cue (“sign-trackers”) vs. others that approached the location of reward delivery (“goal-trackers”). This variation in Pavlovian approach behavior predicted other behavioral indices of the propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues. Thus, the procedures reported here should be useful for making comparisons across studies and for assessing individual variation in incentive salience attribution in small samples of the population, or even for classifying single animals