Organization of the VS
The concept of the VS was originally developed by Heimer in 1978 in the classic paper in which he describes the relationship between the NAcc and the olfactory tubercle in rats (
Heimer, 1978). The link between NAcc activity and reward had already been established as part of the self-stimulation circuit originally described by Olds and Milner (
Olds and Milner, 1954). Since the identification of the VS, our concept of the striatal region associated with reward has evolved to include this extended region, expanding the traditional boundary of the NAcc. This entire region has been a focus for the study of reinforcement and the transition between drug use for a reward and as a habit (
Bowman et al, 1996;
Drevets et al, 2001;
Jensen et al, 2003;
Kalivas et al, 2005;
Lyons et al, 1996;
Parkinson et al, 2000;
Schultz et al, 1992;
Taha and Fields, 2006). In human and nonhuman primates, the VS includes the NAcc and the broad continuity between the caudate nucleus and the putamen ventral to the rostral internal capsule, the olfactory tubercle, and the rostrolateral portion of the anterior perforated space adjacent to the lateral olfactory tract (
Haber and McFarland, 1999;
Heimer et al, 1999). Importantly, however, neither cytoarchitectonic nor histochemistry distinctions mark a clear boundary between the VS and the dorsal striatum, which poses a problem for defining locations of activation in imaging and animal studies. Perhaps, the best way, therefore, to define the VS is by its afferent projections from cortical areas that mediate different aspects of reward and emotional processing, namely the vmPFC, OFC, dACC, and the medial temporal lobe, including the amygdala. Using these projections as a guide, the VS occupies over 20% of the striatum in nonhuman primates (
Haber et al, 2006). As a subcomponent of the VS, the term NAcc is best described by a small ventromedial sector in the rostral striatum that receives input from specific cortical regions (see below).
Special features of the VS Although the VS is similar to the dorsal striatum in most respects, there are also some unique features. Within the NAcc region of the VS, a subterritory, called the shell, has a particularly important function in the circuitry underlying goal-directed behaviors, behavioral sensitization, and changes in affective states (
Carlezon and Wise, 1996;
Ito et al, 2004). Although several transmitter and receptor distribution patterns distinguish the shell/core subterritories, calbindin is the most consistent marker for the shell across species (
Alheid and Heimer, 1988;
Ikemoto et al, 1995;
Martin et al, 1993;
Meredith et al, 1996;
Sato et al, 1993). The shell has some unique connectivities that distinguish it from the rest of the VS (indicated below). However, while animal studies have distinguished the shell from the rest of the striatum, the spatial resolution in imaging studies is not yet sufficient to isolate this region in humans.
In addition to the shell compartment, several other characteristics are unique to the VS. The dopamine transporter (DAT) is relatively low in the VS compared to the dorsal striatum. This pattern is consistent with the fact that the dorsal tier dopamine neurons (which project to the VS) express relatively low levels of mRNA for the DAT compared to the ventral tier (which project to the dorsal striatum) (
Counihan and Penney, 1998;
Haber et al, 1995b;
Harrington et al, 1996) (see section Amygdala). The VS has numerous smaller and more densely packed neurons; the dorsal striatum is more homogenous. The VS contains cell islands, including the islands of Calleja, which are thought to contain quiescent immature cells that remain in the adult brain (
Bayer, 1985;
Chronister et al, 1981;
Meyer et al, 1989). The VS also contains many pallidal cells and their dendritic arbors that invade this ventral forebrain territory (see section Ventral pallidum). Finally, and of particular importance, is the fact that while both the dorsal and VS receive input from the cortex, thalamus, and brainstem, the VS alone receives a dense projection from the amygdala and hippocampus (
Friedman et al, 2002;
Fudge et al, 2002;
Russchen et al, 1985).
Connections of the VS () Afferent projections to the VS, like those to the dorsal striatum are derived from three major sources: a massive, generally topographic glutamatergic input from cerebral cortex; a large glutamatergic input from the thalamus; and a smaller, but critical input from the brainstem, primarily from the midbrain dopaminergic cells. Although this section primarily focuses on the connections of the VS, it gives some attention to the dorsal striatum, especially the caudate nucleus, an area that is also involved in reward-based learning (
Cromwell and Schultz, 2003;
Kennerley and Wallis, 2009;
Watanabe and Hikosaka, 2005). This region receives input from the dPFC.
Cortical projections Cortico-striatal projections form dense, focal patches that can be visualized at low magnification. These terminal projections are organized in a functional topographic manner (Parent and Hazroti, 1995): the dorsolateral striatum receives cortical input from sensory-motor areas; the central striatum receives input from associative cortical areas; and the VS receives input from limbic areas. Within each general functional region (limbic, associative, and motor), terminals are also topographically organized. Thus, inputs from the vmPFC, OFC, and dACC terminate within subregions of the VS, and the dPFC terminates primarily in the caudate nucleus (
Haber et al, 1995a;
Selemon and Goldman-Rakic, 1985). The focal projection field from the vmPFC is the most limited. It is concentrated within the NAcc, including the shell ( and ). The vmPFC also projects to the medial wall of the caudate nucleus, adjacent to the ventricle. The densest input from agranular insular cortex also terminates in the NAcc and at the medial wall of the caudate (
Chikama et al, 1997). Less data is available concerning the projections of area 10 to the VS, particularly medial area 10. However, tracer injections into dorsal and lateral area 10 project to the medial wall of the rostral caudate (overlapping with inputs from the vmPFC) (
Ferry et al, 2000). Based on these data, one might assume that the medial and ventral area 10 (an area included in the mPFC in the imaging studies described above) would terminate in the NAcc. Thus, the NAcc in primates receives convergent input from the olfactory and visceral-associated insula, from the vmPFC, and most likely from area 10.
The dorsal and lateral parts of the VS (the ventral caudate nucleus and putamen) receive inputs from the OFC ( and ). These terminals also extend dorsally, along the medial caudate nucleus, but lateral to those derived from the vmPFC. The medial to lateral and rostral to caudal topographic organization of the OFC terminal fields is consistent with the positions of OFC regions in the PFC. That is, inputs from lateral parts of the OFC (ie, area 12) terminate lateral to those derived from more medial areas (area 13). For the most part, fibers from the OFC terminate lateral to the NAcc. Finally, projections from the dACC extend from the rostral pole of the striatum to the anterior commissure and are located in the rostral, central caudate nucleus and central putamen ( and ). These terminals primarily avoid the NAcc, terminating somewhat lateral to those from the OFC. Taken together, the vmPFC, OFC, and dACC project primarily to the rostral striatum, with the vmPFC projecting most medially (to the NAcc) and the dACC most laterally (
Haber et al, 2006), with the OFC terminal fields positioned between them. In contrast, the dPFC projects throughout the rostrocaudal extent of the striatum, terminating primarily in the head of the caudate and in part of the rostral putamen ( and ), but continuing into the caudal caudate nucleus. For the anatomical details concerning prefrontal corticostriatal projections, see
Haber et al (1995a) and
Selemon and Goldman-Rakic (1985).
Intergration between cortico-striatal projections Although the topographic organization of cortico-striatal projections is well documented, there is increasing evidence for regions of interface between terminals from different cortical areas, suggesting functional integration. For example, early studies showed that cortico-striatal terminals from sensory and motor cortex converge within the striatum (
Flaherty and Graybiel, 1993). Here, axons from each area synapse onto single fast spiking GABAergic interneurons. Interestingly, these interneurons are more responsive to cortical input than the medium spiny cells (
Charpier et al, 1999;
Mallet et al, 2005;
Ramanathan et al, 2002;
Takada et al, 1998). This suggests a potentially critical role for interneurons to integrate information from different cortical areas before passing that information onto the medium spiny projection cells.
Recent studies reveal that projections from the OFC, vmPFC, and dACC also converge in specific regions within the VS. Thus, focal terminal fields from the vmPFC, OFC, and dACC show a complex interweaving and convergence, providing an anatomical substrate for modulation between these circuits (
Haber et al, 2006) (). For example, in certain regions, the vmPFC projection field converges with that from the OFC. Moreover, projections from the dACC and OFC regions do not occupy completely separate territories in any part of the striatum, but converge most extensively at rostral levels. In addition, projections from dACC and OFC also converge with inputs from the dPFC, particularly at the most rostral striatal levels. A similar pattern of both topographic and integrative connectivity of cortico-striatal projections has been demonstrated in the human brain using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). These data show a similar overall organization of the different cortical regions and the striatum, providing a strong correlation between monkey anatomical-tracing studies and human DTI studies (
Draganski et al, 2008). Taken together, a coordinated activation of dPFC, dACC, and/or OFC terminals in these subregions could produce a unique combinatorial activation at the specific sites for channeling reward-based incentive drive in selecting between different valued options. Functional imaging studies do not, at this time, have the resolution to specifically detect these convergence zones. Nonetheless, the fact that these areas exist may help explain complex activation patterns following different reward-related paradigms described below.
In addition to focal projection fields described above, the cortex also has a diffuse projection system to the striatum. Based on intracellular tracer injections into individual neurons, cortico-striatal axons have been shown to travel some distance (
Parent and Parent, 2006;
Zheng and Wilson, 2002), invading striatal regions that receive their focal input from other prefrontal cortex areas (). Collectively, the diffuse projections from each cortical area consist of clusters of terminal fibers that are widely distributed throughout the striatum, not only expanding the borders of the focal terminal fields, but also extending throughout other regions of the striatum (
Haber et al, 2006). For example, the diffuse projection from the vmPFC extends lateral and dorsal to its focal projection field. The diffuse OFC fibers extend deep into the dorsal caudate, central caudate, and putamen, with extensive convergence with both focal and diffuse projections from the dACC and the dPFC (). Finally, clusters of dPFC fibers terminate throughout the rostral striatum, including the VS. Thus, the diffuse fiber system constitutes a large population of axons invading each focal projection field. Under certain conditions, if collectively activated, they may provide the recruitment strength necessary to modulate striatal activity by broadly disseminating cortical information. This relatively low level of modulation may provide an anatomical substrate for cross-encoding information to influence the future firing of medium spiny neurons (
Kasanetz et al, 2008), playing an important role in the temporal activation of different striatal regions during learning. Taken together, the fronto-striatal network constitutes a dual system comprising both topographically organized terminal fields and subregions that contain convergent pathways derived from functionally discrete cortical areas (
Draganski et al, 2008;
Haber et al, 2006).
The amygdala and hippocampal projections to the VS Overall, the basal nucleus and the magnocellular division of the accessory basal nucleus are the main source of inputs to the VS (
Fudge et al, 2002;
Russchen et al, 1985). The lateral nucleus has a relatively minor input to the VS. The amygdala has few inputs to the dorsal striatum in primates. Although the basal and accessory basal nuclei innervate both the NAcc and the larger regions of the VS striatum, the densest projection appears to be within the NAcc. The shell of the NAcc, however, is set apart from the rest of the VS by a specific set of connections derived from the medial part of the central nucleus (CeM), periamygdaloid cortex, and the medial nucleus of the amygdala. In contrast to the amygdala, the hippocampal formation projects to a more limited region of the VS, primarily derived not only from the subiculum, but also from the parasubiculum and part of CA1 (
Friedman et al, 2002). The main terminal field is located in the most medial and ventral parts of the VS and is essentially confined to the NAcc shell. Here, these inputs overlap with those from the amygdala and from the vmPFC. Taken together, the existence of convergent fibers from cortex within the VS, along with hippocampal and amygdalo-striatal projections, places the VS as a key entry port for processing emotional and motivational information that, in turn, drives basal ganglia action output (see Sesack and Grace in this volume). Within the VS, the NAcc receives the densest innervation from the amygdala, hippocampus, and the vmPFC.
Thalamic projections to the VS The midline and medial intralaminar thalamic nuclei project to medial prefrontal areas, the amygdala, and hippocampus. As such, they are referred to as the limbic-related thalamic nuclear groups (
Akert and Hartmann-von Monakow, 1980;
Yakovlev et al, 1960). These nuclei also project to the VS (
Berendse and Groenewegen, 1990;
Giménez-Amaya et al, 1995). As seen with the cortical projections, the NAcc receives the most limited input, which is derived almost exclusively from the midline nuclei. The medial wall of the caudate nucleus receives projections, not only from the midline and the medial intralaminar nuclei, but also from the central superior lateral nucleus. In contrast, the lateral part of the VS receives a limited projection from the midline thalamic nuclei. Its input is mainly from the intraliminar nuclei (the parafascicular nucleus and the central superior lateral nucleus). In addition to the midline and intralaminar thalamo-striatal projections, in primates, there is a large input from the ‘specific' thalamic-basal ganglia relay nuclei, the MD, ventral anterior, and ventral lateral nuclei (
McFarland and Haber, 2001). The VS receives this input from the medial MD nucleus and a limited projection from the magnocellular subdivision of the ventral anterior nucleus.
Efferent projections from the VS The VS, like those to the dorsal striatum, projects primarily to the pallidum and midbrain (
Haber et al, 1990a;
Hedreen and DeLong, 1991;
Parent et al, 1997) (). Specifically, fibers terminate topographically in the subcommissural VP, the rostral pole of the external segment, and the rostromedial portion of the internal segment (see section Ventral pallidum). The more central and caudal portions of the globus pallidus do not receive this input. Fibers from the VS projecting to the midbrain are not as confined to as specific a region as those projecting to the pallidum. Although the densest terminal fields are in the medial portion (VTA and medial SN), numerous fibers also extend laterally to innervate the entire dorsal tier of the midbrain dopaminergic neurons (see section Midbrain Dopamine Neurons for a more detailed discussion on the SN). Projections from the medial part of the VS continue more caudally, terminating in the pedunculopontine nucleus. In addition to these projections, the VS also terminates in nonbasal ganglia regions (
Haber et al, 1990a;
Zahm and Heimer, 1993). The shell sends fibers caudally and medially into the lateral hypothalamus and, to some extent, in the periaqueductal gray. Axons from the medial VS (including the shell) also terminate in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, indicating a direct striatal influence on the extended amygdala (see Davis and Grillon in this volume). Finally, axons from ventral regions of the VS terminate in the nucleus basalis. This connection has been demonstrated at the light microscopic level in monkeys and verified at the EM level in rodents (
Beach et al, 1987;
Chang et al, 1987;
Haber, 1987;
Martinez-Murillo et al, 1988;
Zaborszky and Cullinan, 1992). A projection to the nucleus basalis in the basal forebrain is of particular interest, since this is the main source of cholinergic fibers to the cerebral cortex and the amygdala. These data indicate that the VS may influence cortex directly, without going through the pallidal and thalamic circuit. This may provide a route through which reward circuit has access to a wider region of frontal cortex than via the more confined ventral cortico-basal ganglia circuit.
Reward Processing in the Human VS
To localize striatal activation, researchers have devised structural schemes that distinguish ventral from dorsal striatum in the case of PET or NAcc from caudate and putamen in the case of FMRI (
Breiter et al, 1997;
Drevets et al, 2001;
Mawlawi et al, 2001) (). These schemes are based on anatomical landmarks that define more restricted areas than the patterns of connectivity described above. For instance, based on the primate anatomy reviewed above, inputs to the region labeled as VS (upper panel) likely come from the vmPFC, amygdala, and the hippocampus, and some, but not all, from OFC regions (particularly the more lateral OFC areas). The region labeled as the NAcc (lower panel) is smaller and likely receives a more limited subset of inputs from the vmPFC and amygdala. However, it receives most of its input from the mPFC and hippocampus. Connectivity studies (as indicated above) suggest that the VS encompasses a larger region, which includes the medial caudate nucleus and rostroventral putamen along with the NAcc. Thus, here the term VS refers the NAcc, the ventral medial caudate, and the rostroventral putamen. Mention of any of these subcomponents alone implies a more specific focus on activation in that region, but does not exclude the possibility of activation in other ventral striatal subcomponents.
Both metabolic and ligand-based PET studies have shown recruitment of striatal regions during reward processing. For instance, metabolic PET studies suggest that exposure to both primary (ie, pleasant tastes and sounds) and secondary rewards (ie, monetary gambles) can increase striatal activity (
Blood and Zatorre, 2001;
Kunig et al, 2000;
Martin-Solch et al, 2001;
Small et al, 2001). Similarly, initial FMRI studies of reward processing have also shown that both primary (ie, pleasant tastes, smells, sights, sounds, and touch) and secondary (ie, monetary gain) rewards could increase striatal activation, consistent with the notion that striatal activation does not depend on sensory modality (
Aharon et al, 2001;
Anderson et al, 2003;
Delgado et al, 2000;
Elliott et al, 2000b;
Gottfried et al, 2002;
Knutson et al, 2000;
Menon and Levitin, 2005;
Mobbs et al, 2003;
O'Doherty et al, 2001;
Rolls et al, 2003). As with studies of the frontal cortex, many of these studies also included unpleasant and neutral stimuli, thus controlling for arousal and other confounds (eg, perceptual and behavioral demands). Owing to either reduced temporal resolution or temporally nonspecific questions, however, these studies did not establish when neural activation occurred during reward processing.
Although it has similar spatial resolution and less temporal resolution than metabolic PET (ie, on the order of hours), ligand-based PET confers a unique advantage of supporting inference about dopamine release in the striatum. Relative to placebo injection, amphetamine injection robustly increases striatal dopamine (inferred from radioactive ligand displacement), and these increases can correlate with positive and arousing affective experience (eg, feelings of ‘euphoria') (
Drevets et al, 2001;
Leyton et al, 2002;
Martinez et al, 2003;
Volkow et al, 1999). Consumption of alcohol and cocaine also increase dopamine release in the VS (
Boileau et al, 2003;
Cox et al, 2009). Secondary rewards such as playing videogame and gambling may also increase dopamine release in parts of the striatum, albeit less consistently and robustly (
Koepp et al, 1998;
Pappata et al, 2002;
Zald et al, 2004).
Event-related FMRI enabled researchers to track changes in striatal activity during different phases of reward processing. This increased temporal specificity coincided with an increase in the number of FMRI studies documenting ventral striatal activation. For instance, in the case of primary rewards, anticipation of a pleasant (but not an unpleasant) taste elicits ventral striatal and OFC activation, whereas the pleasant taste itself elicits only OFC activation (
O'Doherty et al, (2002). In the case of secondary rewards, anticipation of uncertain monetary rewards (but not punishments) increases NAcc activation, whereas obtaining (
vs not obtaining) rewards increased MPFC activation and kept putamen activation from decreasing (
Breiter et al, 2001;
Knutson et al, 2001b,
2003).
Anticipated reward can vary along many dimensions, including magnitude, probability, uncertainty, delay, and effort. NAcc activation in these and other imaging studies clearly increases proportional to the magnitude of anticipated monetary reward (
Knutson et al, 2001a;
Yacubian et al, 2006) (). Although medial caudate and MD thalamic activation also increases proportional to the magnitude of anticipated reward, they additionally increased proportional to the magnitude of anticipated punishment. A recent meta-analysis of over 20 similar FMRI studies has confirmed preferential activation of the NAcc during anticipation of monetary gains, but not during anticipation of losses (
Knutson and Greer, 2008). Depth-electrode recordings of epileptic patients gambling have also shown that NAcc activity increases proportional to the magnitude of anticipated reward (
Cohen et al, 2009a). This proportional response to anticipated reward magnitude provided an anchor for exploring the impact of varying other attributes of anticipated reward. An increasing number of subsequent studies have focused on whether other aspects of anticipated reward besides magnitude might increase NAcc activation (eg, probability, uncertainty, delay and effort).
Probability refers to the likelihood that an anticipated reward will occur, and individuals usually value rewards with high probabilities. Probability can be related to uncertainty, as moderate ranges of probability can imply maximum uncertainty about an outcome (eg, 50% probability is least informative about whether a given outcome will occur or not occur). During reward anticipation, ventral striatal activation has been reported to track uncertainty in some studies, but probability in other studies. For instance, some studies find that VS activation peaks at intermediate probability levels, consistent with maximal uncertainty (
Cooper and Knutson, 2008;
Dreher et al, 2006;
Knutson et al, 2005;
Preuschoff et al, 2006). Other studies, however, have reported linear effects of anticipated reward probability on VS activation (
Abler et al, 2006;
Hsu et al, 2009;
Tobler et al, 2008;
Yacubian et al, 2006). A large subsequent study investigated the possibility that different subcomponents within the VS showed greater sensitivity to anticipated reward magnitude
vs probability (
Yacubian et al, 2007). Although peak responsiveness to magnitude occupied the NAcc and medial caudate, peak responsiveness to probability occupied the rostroventral putamen, suggesting differential sensitivity to anticipated reward magnitude
vs probability in different VS subcomponents (see also
Preuschoff et al, 2006;
Tobler et al, 2007).
Delay refers to the amount of time until an anticipated reward can be obtained, and individuals usually devalue or ‘discount' rewards with long delays. Initial FMRI studies found evidence that VS activation increased when immediate
vs delayed rewards were considered and decreased with the delay of future rewards (
Kable and Glimcher, 2007;
McClure et al, 2007;
McClure et al, 2004a). A subsequent study separately examined VS responses to information about the magnitude and delay of future rewards and found that while NAcc activation alone increased with the magnitude of a future rewards, activation in frontal regions (eg, mPFC and dPFC) instead showed sensitivity to the delay of future rewards (
Ballard and Knutson, 2009).
Effort refers to how much an individual must work to get an anticipated reward, and individuals usually devalue rewards that require substantial effort. Investigators have also examined the influence of anticipated effort on VS activation. They found that while anticipated reward magnitude increased NAcc and medial caudate activation, anticipated reward effort decreased activation in a partially overlapping region of the rostroventral putamen (
Croxson et al, 2009) (see also
Botvinick et al, 2009). Together, these studies raise the possibility that while anticipated reward magnitude consistently increases NAcc and medial caudate activation, other aspects of anticipated value (eg, anticipated probability and effort) may elicit more pronounced activation in the rostroventral putamen subcomponent of the VS.
Within the VS, overlap between these regions may combine distinct aspects of anticipated reward. The findings also raise the possibility of a temporal flow of information through the VS to the dorsal striatum. If the NAcc is recruited early during reward prediction, it may respond to relatively basic information about reward magnitude, whereas other considerations may influence reward processing as activation moves dorsolaterally through the striatum, perhaps as a function of integration of information from prefrontal circuits (). Such a dynamic flow of information might occur either through cortico-striatal connections as described in the earlier section or through striato-nigral-striatal connections (described below) or both.
Other research has focused on neural responses to reward outcomes (ie, when potential, but uncertain rewards are obtained or lost). Several studies have associated activation of the medial caudate portion of the VS with rewarding (
vs nonrewarding) outcomes (
Delgado et al, 2003,
2000). The medial caudate likely receives inputs from a combination of vmPFC, OFC, dACC, and possibly dPFC. This region responds to relative as well as absolute reward outcomes (ie, when an individual compares what she received to what she might have, but did not receive) (
Kuhnen and Knutson, 2005;
Lohrenz et al, 2007;
Nieuwenhuis et al, 2005). These findings share similarities to an earlier literature suggesting that ‘cognitive' feedback can elicit caudate activation (
Elliott et al, 1997;
Poldrack et al, 1999). Moreover, it establishes that rewards can enhance this activation (
Tricomi et al, 2006). Outcome-elicited medial caudate activation may promote choice of the next best action, as it is most prominent when reward feedback informs subsequent actions (
O'Doherty et al, 2004) and decreases as action requirements become more predictable (
Delgado et al, 2005). Taken together, the anatomy and imaging data supports the idea that the medial caudate may integrate information from reward and cognitive cortical areas in the development of strategic action planning.
Reward outcomes can also influence VS activation. Specifically, several studies indicate that omission (
vs delivery) of expected rewards can decrease VS activation (
Berns et al, 2001;
Knutson et al, 2001b;
Ramnani et al, 2004). Given that reward anticipation can increase, and nonreward outcomes can decrease, VS activation, theorists have proposed that VS activity tracks a reward prediction error (or the difference between expected and obtained rewards) (
McClure et al, 2007;
Montague et al, 1996;
Schultz et al, 1997). Indeed, computational modeling of brain activity during reward learning indicates that a reward prediction error term correlates with activity in the rostroventral putamen (
McClure et al, 2003;
O'Doherty et al, 2003b). As the NAcc and medial caudate subcomponents robustly activate during reward anticipation, and the rostroventral putamen most reliably deactivates in response to nonreward delivery, it remains to be established whether common or distinct subcomponents of the VS respond to both events. One meta-analysis of monetary incentive delay studies suggests that the NAcc and medial caudate may respond more robustly during reward anticipation, but the rostroventral putamen in response to reward outcomes. However, these subcomponents may prove more difficult to dissociate in dynamic studies that involve learning. If different phases of reward-processing recruit distinct VS subcomponents, further enhancements in the spatial and temporal resolution of FMRI may help to test these hypotheses and yield new insights.