We have reviewed the nature of reward, aversive, and alerting signals in DA neurons, and have proposed a hypothesis about the underlying neural pathways and their roles in motivated behavior. We consider this to be a working hypothesis, a guide for future theories and research that will bring us to a more complete understanding. Here we will highlight several areas where further investigation is needed to reveal deeper complexities.
At the present time, our understanding of the neural pathways underlying DA signals is at an early stage. Therefore, we have attempted to infer the sources and destinations of value and salience coding DA signals largely based on indirect measures such as the neural response properties and functional roles of different brain areas. It will be important to put these candidate pathways to a direct test and to discover their detailed properties, aided by recently developed tools that allow DA transmission to be monitored (
Robinson et al., 2008) and controlled (
Tsai et al., 2009;
Tecuapetla et al., 2010;
Stuber et al., 2010) with high spatial and temporal precision. As noted above, several of these candidate structures have a topographic organization, suggesting that their communication with DA neurons might be topographic as well. The neural sources of phasic DA signals may also be more complex than the simple feedforward pathways we have proposed, since the neural structures that communicate with DA neurons are densely interconnected (
Geisler and Zahm, 2005) and DA neurons can communicate with each other within the midbrain (
Ford et al., 2010).
We have focused on a selected set of DA neuron connections, but DA neurons receive functional input from many additional structures including the subthalamic nucleus, laterodorsal tegmental nucleus, bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, prefrontal cortex, ventral pallidum, and lateral hypothalamus (
Grace et al., 2007;
Shimo and Wichmann, 2009;
Jalabert et al., 2009). Notably, lateral hypothalamus orexin neurons project to DA neurons, are activated by rewarding rather than aversive events, and trigger drug-seeking behavior (
Harris and Aston-Jones, 2006), suggesting a possible role in value-related functions. DA neurons also send projections to many additional structures including the hypothalamus, hippocampus, amygdala, habenula, and a great many cortical areas. Notably, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) has been proposed to receive reward prediction error signals from DA neurons (
Holroyd and Coles, 2002) and contains neurons with activity positively related to motivational value (
Koyama et al., 1998). Yet ACC activation is also linked to aversive processing (
Vogt, 2005;
Johansen and Fields, 2004). These ACC functions might be supported by a mixture of DA motivational value and salience signals, which will be important to test in future study. Indeed, neural signals related to reward prediction errors have been reported in several areas including the medial prefrontal cortex (
Matsumoto et al., 2007;
Seo and Lee, 2007), orbitofrontal cortex (
Sul et al., 2010) (but see (
Takahashi et al., 2009;
Kennerley and Wallis, 2009)), and dorsal striatum (
Kim et al., 2009;
Oyama et al., 2010), and their causal relationship to DA neuron activity remains to be discovered.
We have described motivational events with a simple dichotomy, classifying them as ‘rewarding’ or ‘aversive’. Yet these categories contain great variety. An aversive illness is gradual, prolonged, and caused by internal events; an aversive airpuff is fast, brief, and caused by the external world. These situations demand very different behavioral responses which are likely to be supported by different neural systems. Furthermore, although we have focused our discussion on two types of DA neurons with signals resembling motivational value and salience, a close examination shows that DA neurons are not limited to this strict dichotomy. As indicated by our notion of an anatomical gradient some DA neurons transmit mixtures of both salience-like and value-like signals; still other DA neurons respond to rewarding but not aversive events (
Matsumoto and Hikosaka, 2009b;
Bromberg-Martin et al., 2010a). These considerations suggest that some DA neurons may not encode motivational events along our intuitive axis of ‘good’ vs. ‘bad’ and may instead be specialized to support specific forms of adaptive behavior.
Even in the realm of rewards, there is evidence that DA neurons transmit different reward signals to different brain regions (
Bassareo and Di Chiara, 1999;
Ito et al., 2000;
Stefani and Moghaddam, 2006;
Wightman et al., 2007;
Aragona et al., 2009). Diverse responses reported in the SNc and VTA include neurons that: respond only to the start of a trial (
Roesch et al., 2007), perhaps encoding a pure alerting signal; respond differently to visual and auditory modalities (
Strecker and Jacobs, 1985), perhaps receiving input from different SC and PPTg neurons; respond to the first or last event in a sequence (
Ravel and Richmond, 2006;
Jin and Costa, 2010); have sustained activation by risky rewards (
Fiorillo et al., 2003); or are activated during body movements (
Schultz, 1986;
Kiyatkin, 1988a;
Puryear et al., 2010;
Jin and Costa, 2010) (see also (
Phillips et al., 2003b;
Stuber et al., 2005)). While each of these response patterns has only been reported in a minority of studies or neurons, this data suggests that DA neurons could potentially be divided into a much larger number of functionally distinct populations.
A final and important consideration is that present recording studies in behaving animals do not yet provide fully conclusive measurements of DA neuron activity, because these studies have only been able to distinguish between DA and non-DA neurons using indirect methods, based on neural properties such as firing rate, spike waveform, and sensitivity to D2 receptor agonists (
Grace and Bunney, 1983;
Schultz, 1986). These techniques appear to identify DA neurons reliably within the SNc, indicated by several lines of evidence including comparison of intracellular and extracellular methods, juxtacellular recordings, and the effects of DA-specific lesions (
Grace and Bunney, 1983;
Grace et al., 2007;
Brown et al., 2009). However, recent studies indicate that this technique may be less reliable in the VTA, where DA and non-DA neurons have a wider variety of cellular properties (
Margolis et al., 2006;
Margolis et al., 2008;
Lammel et al., 2008;
Brischoux et al., 2009). Even direct measurements of DA concentrations in downstream structures do not provide conclusive evidence of DA neuron spiking activity, because DA concentrations may be controlled by additional factors such as glutamatergic activation of DA axon terminals (
Cheramy et al., 1991) and rapid changes in the activity of DA transporters (
Zahniser and Sorkin, 2004). To perform fully conclusive measurements of DA neuron activity during active behavior it will be necessary to use new recording techniques, such as combining extracellular recording with optogenetic stimulation (
Jin and Costa, 2010).