Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2024-07
Behavioral Interventions Can Improve Brain Injury-Induced Deficits in Behavioral Flexibility and Impulsivity Linked to Impaired Reward-Feedback Beta Oscillations
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) affects a large population, resulting in severe cognitive impairments. Although cognitive rehabilitation is an accepted treatment for some deficits, studies in patients are limited in ability to probe physiological and behavioral mechanisms. Therefore, animal models are needed to optimize strategies. Frontal TBI in a rat model results in robust and replicable cognitive deficits, making this an ideal candidate for investigating various behavioral interventions. In this study, we report three distinct frontal TBI experiments assessing behavior well into the chronic post-injury period using male Long-Evans rats. First, we evaluated the impact of frontal injury on local field potentials recorded simultaneously from 12 brain regions during a probabilistic reversal learning (PbR) task. Next, a set of rats were tested on a similar PbR task or an impulsivity task (differential reinforcement of low-rate behavior [DRL]) and half received salient cues associated with reinforcement contingencies to encourage engagement in the target behavior. After intervention on the PbR task, brains were stained for markers of activity. On the DRL task, cue relevance was decoupled from outcomes to determine if beneficial effects persisted on impulsive behavior. TBI decreased the ability to detect reinforced outcomes; this was evident in task performance and reward-feedback signals occurring at beta frequencies in lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and associated frontostriatal regions. The behavioral intervention improved flexibility and increased OFC activity. Intervention also reduced impulsivity, even after cues were decoupled, which was partially mediated by improvements in timing behavior. The current study established a platform to begin investigating cognitive rehabilitation in rats and identified a strong role for dysfunctional OFC signaling in probabilistic learning after frontal TBI.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
VaishnaviS, RaoV, FannJR. Neuropsychiatric problems after traumatic brain injury: unraveling the silent epidemic. Psychosomatics, 2009; 50(3):198–205; doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.50.3.198
2.
Moreno-LópezL, ManktelowAE, SahakianBJ, et al.Anything goes? Regulation of the neural processes underlying response inhibition in TBI patients. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol, 2017; 27(2):159–169; doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2016.12.002
3.
ShererM, NickTG, MillisSR, et al.Use of the WCST and the WCST-64 in the assessment of traumatic brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol, 2003; 25(4):512–520; doi: 10.1076/jcen.25.4.512.13877
4.
MillerSC, BaktashSH, WebbTS, et al.Risk for addiction-related disorders following mild traumatic brain injury in a large cohort of active-duty U.S. airmen. Am J Psychiatry, 2013; 170(4):383–390; doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12010126
5.
Novakovic-AgopianT, ChenAJ-W, RomeS, et al.Rehabilitation of executive functioning with training in attention regulation applied to individually defined goals: a pilot study bridging theory, assessment, and treatment. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2011; 26(5):325–338; doi: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181f1ead2
6.
Novakovic-AgopianT, PosecionL, KornblithE, et al.Goal-oriented attention self-regulation training improves executive functioning in veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder and mild traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma, 2021; 38(5):582–592; doi: 10.1089/neu.2019.6806
7.
FettaJ, StarkweatherA, GillJM. Computer-based cognitive rehabilitation interventions for traumatic brain injury: a critical review of the literature. J Neurosci Nurs, 2017; 49(4):235; doi: 10.1097/JNN.0000000000000298
ButtsK, FlorescoS, PhillipsA. Acute stress impairs set-shifting but not reversal learning. Behav Brain Res, 2013; 252:222–229; doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.06.007
10.
CraineTJ, RaceNS, KutashLA, et al.Milnacipran ameliorates executive function impairments following frontal lobe traumatic brain injury in male rats: a multimodal behavioral assessment. J Neurotrauma, 2023; 40(1-2):112–124; doi: 10.1089/neu.2022.0289
11.
DaltonGL, PhillipsAG, FlorescoSB. Preferential involvement by nucleus accumbens shell in mediating probabilistic learning and reversal shifts. J Neurosci, 2014; 34(13):4618-–4626; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5058-13.2014.
12.
OzgaJE, PovroznikJM, Engler-ChiurazziEB, et al.Executive (dys)function after traumatic brain injury: Special considerations for behavioral pharmacology. Behav Pharmacol, 2018; 29(7):617–637; doi: 10.1097/FBP.0000000000000430
13.
Ozga-HessJE, WhirtleyC, O'HearnC, et al.Unilateral parietal brain injury increases risk-taking on a rat gambling task. Exp Neurol, 2020; 327:113217; doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2020.113217
14.
ShaverTK, OzgaJE, ZhuB, et al.Long-term deficits in risky decision-making after traumatic brain injury on a rat analog of the Iowa gambling task. Brain Res, 2019; 1704:103–113; doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2018.10.004
15.
Vonder HaarC, MartensKM, RiparipL-K, et al.Frontal traumatic brain injury increases impulsive decision making in rats: a potential role for the inflammatory cytokine interleukin-12. J Neurotrauma, 2017; 34(19):2790–2800; doi: 10.1089/neu.2016.4813
16.
WilsonMP, KellerFS. On the selective reinforcement of spaced responses. J Comp Physiol Psychol, 1953; 46(3):190; doi: 10.1037/h0057705
17.
LindnerMD, PloneMA, CainCK, et al.Dissociable long-term cognitive deficits after frontal versus sensorimotor cortical contusions. J Neurotrauma, 1998; 15(3):199–216; doi: 10.1089/neu.1998.15.199
18.
MenonV, AdlemanNE, WhiteCD, et al.Error-related brain activation during a Go/NoGo response inhibition task. Hum Brain Mapp, 2001; 12(3):131–143; doi: 10.1002/1097-0193(200103)12:3<131::aid-hbm1010>3.0.co;2-c
19.
CerpaJC, CoutureauE, ParkesSL. Dopamine and noradrenaline modulation of goal-directed behavior in orbital and medial prefrontal cortex: toward a division of labor?. Behav Neurosci, 2021; 135(2):138–153; doi: 10.1037/bne0000426
20.
ChenY-H, HuangEY-K, KuoT-T, et al.Dopamine release impairment in striatum after different levels of cerebral cortical fluid percussion injury. Cell Transplant, 2015; 24(10):2113–2128; doi: 10.3727/096368914X683584
21.
ModrakCG, GieslerLP, Vonder HaarC. Traumatic brain injury substantially reduces the conditioned reinforcing effects of environmental cues in rats. Brain Res, 2020; 1748:147084; doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2020.147084
22.
Vonder HaarC, MaassWR, JacobsEA, et al.Deficits in discrimination following experimental frontal brain injury are mediated by motivation and can be improved by nicotinamide administration. J Neurotrauma, 2014; 31(20):1711–1720; doi: 10.1089/neu.2014.3459
23.
MuelblMJ, SlakerML, ShahAS, et al.Effects of mild blast traumatic brain injury on cognitive-and addiction-related behaviors. Sci Rep, 2018; 8(1):9941; doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-28062-0
24.
SchlundMW. Effects of acquired brain injury on adaptive choice and the role of reduced sensitivity to contingencies. Brain Inj, 2002; 16(6):527–535; doi: 10.1080/02699050110113679
25.
SchlundMW, PaceG. The effects of traumatic brain injury on reporting and responding to causal relations: An investigation of sensitivity to reinforcement contingencies. Brain Inj, 2000; 14(6):573–583; doi: 10.1080/026990500120475
26.
SanderAM, ClarkAN, ArciniegasDB, et al.A randomized controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for psychological distress among persons with traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil, 2021; 31(7):1105–1129; doi: 10.1080/09602011.2020.1762670
27.
BaileyC, PetersonJR, SchnegelsiepenA, et al.Durability and generalizability of time-based intervention effects on impulsive choice in rats. Behav Processes, 2018; 152:54–62; doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2018.03.003
28.
PetersonJR, KirkpatrickK. The effects of a time-based intervention on experienced middle-aged rats. Behav Processes, 2016; 133:44–51; doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.11.002
FakhraeiL, FrancoeurM, BalasubramaniP, et al.Mapping large-scale networks associated with action, behavioral inhibition and impulsivity. eNeuro, 2021; 8(1); doi: 10.1523/eneuro.0406-20.2021
31.
FakhraeiL, FrancoeurM, BalasubramaniPP, et al.Electrophysiological correlates of rodent default-mode network suppression revealed by large-scale local field potential recordings. Cerebral Cortex Communications, 2021; 2(2):tgab034; doi: 10.1093/texcom/tgab034
32.
KoloskiMF, HulyalkarS, TangT, et al.Cortico-striatal beta-oscillations as a marker of learned reward value. bioRxiv, 2022:2022.10.24.513264
33.
RayS, CroneNE, NieburE, et al.Neural correlates of high-gamma oscillations (60–200 Hz) in macaque local field potentials and their potential implications in electrocorticography. J Neurosci, 2008; 28(45):11526–11536; doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.2848-08.2008
34.
MartensKM, PechacekKM, ModrakCG, et al.Cathodal transcranial direct-current stimulation selectively reduces impulsivity after TBI. J Neurotrauma, 2019; 36(19):2827–2830; doi: 10.1089/neu.2019.6470
35.
ColeJT, YarnellA, KeanWS, et al.Craniotomy: True sham for traumatic brain injury, or a sham of a sham?. J Neurotrauma, 2011; 28:359–369; doi: 10.1089/neu.2010.1427
36.
FrancoeurMJ, TangT, FakhraeiL, et al.Chronic, multi-site recordings supported by two low-cost, stationary probe designs optimized to capture either single unit or local field potential activity in behaving rats. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2021; 12; doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.678103
37.
BuscherN, OjedaA, FrancoeurM, et al.Open-source raspberry Pi-based operant box for translational behavioral testing in rodents. J Neurosci Methods, 2020; 342:108761; doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.108761
38.
RayLA, RocheD, HeinzerlingK, et al.Opportunities for the development of neuroimmune therapies in addiction. Int Rev Neurobiol, 2014; 118:381–401; doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801284-0.00012-9
39.
CuiY, LiuLD, McFarlandJM, et al.Inferring cortical variability from local field potentials. J Neurosci, 2016; 36(14):4121–4135; doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.2502-15.2016
40.
FowlerSC, PinkstonJ, VorontsovaE. Timing and space usage are disrupted by amphetamine in rats maintained on DRL 24-s and DRL 72-s schedules of reinforcement. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 2009; 204(2):213–225; doi: 10.1007/s00213-008-1451-x
41.
ChengR-K, MacDonaldCJ, MeckWH. Differential effects of cocaine and ketamine on time estimation: Implications for neurobiological models of interval timing. Pharmacol Biochem Behav, 2006; 85(1):114–122; doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2006.07.019
42.
FrankotM, MuellerPM, YoungME, et al.Statistical power and false positive rates for interdependent outcomes are strongly influenced by test type: Implications for behavioral neuroscience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 2023; 48(11):1612–1622; doi: 10.1038/s41386-023-01592-6
43.
DixonMR, JacobsEA, SandersS, et al.Impulsivity, self-control, and delay discounting in persons with acquired brain injury. Behav Interv, 2005; 20(1):101–120; https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.173
44.
Vonder HaarC, LamFCW, AdamsWA, et al.Frontal traumatic brain injury in rats causes long-lasting impairments in impulse control that are differentially sensitive to pharmacotherapeutics and associated with chronic neuroinflammation. ACS Chem Neurosci, 2016; 7(11):1531–1542; doi: 10.1021/acschemneuro.6b00166
PesaranB, NelsonMJ, AndersenRA. Free choice activates a decision circuit between frontal and parietal cortex. Nature, 2008; 453(7193):406–409; doi: 10.1038/nature06849
47.
TorrecillosF, AlayranguesJ, KilavikBE, et al.Distinct modulations in sensorimotor postmovement and foreperiod β-band activities related to error salience processing and sensorimotor adaptation. J Neurosci, 2015; 35(37):12753–12765; doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.1090-15.2015
48.
SamsonRD, LesterAW, DuarteL, et al.Emergence of β-band oscillations in the aged rat amygdala during discrimination learning and decision making tasks. eNeuro, 2017; 4(5); doi: 10.1523/eneuro.0245-17.2017
49.
HauflerD, LiranO, BuchananRJ, et al.Human anterior insula signals salience and deviations from expectations via bursts of beta oscillations. J Neurophysiol, 2022; 128(1):160–180; doi: 10.1152/jn.00106.2022
50.
HajiHosseiniA, HolroydCB. Sensitivity of frontal beta oscillations to reward valence but not probability. Neurosci Lett, 2015; 602:99–103; doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2015.06.054
51.
CavanaghJF. Cortical delta activity reflects reward prediction error and related behavioral adjustments, but at different times. NeuroImage, 2015; 110:205–216; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.007
52.
MorrisDM, CragoJE, DeLucaSC, et al.Constraint-induced movement therapy for motor recovery after stroke. NeuroRehabilitation, 1997; 9(1):29–43; doi: 10.3233/nre-1997-9104
53.
DaltonGL, WangNY, PhillipsAG, et al.Multifaceted contributions by different regions of the orbitofrontal and medial prefrontal cortex to probabilistic reversal learning. J Neurosci, 2016; 36(6):1996–2006; doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3366-15.2016
54.
AmodeoL, McMurrayM, RoitmanJ. Orbitofrontal cortex reflects changes in response–outcome contingencies during probabilistic reversal learning. Neuroscience, 2017; 345:27–37; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.03.034
55.
CostaVD, TranVL, TurchiJ, et al.Reversal learning and dopamine: a Bayesian perspective. J Neurosci, 2015; 35(6):2407–2416; doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.1989-14.2015
56.
VoA, SeergobinKN, MorrowSA, et al.Levodopa impairs probabilistic reversal learning in healthy young adults. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 2016; 233(14):2753–2763; doi: 10.1007/s00213-016-4322-x
57.
RabinowitzAR, CollierG, VaccaroM, et al.Development of RehaBot-A conversational agent for promoting rewarding activities in users with traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil, 2022; 37(3):144–151; doi: 10.1097/htr.0000000000000770
58.
KableJW, CaulfieldMK, FalconeM, et al.No effect of commercial cognitive training on brain activity, choice behavior, or cognitive performance. J Neurosci, 2017; 37(31):7390–7402; doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.2832-16.2017
59.
WagnerAK, BrayerSW, HurwitzM, et al.Non-spatial pre-training in the water maze as a clinically relevant model for evaluating learning and memory in experimental TBI. Neurobiol Learn Mem, 2013; 106:71-86; doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2013.07.006
60.
EdwardsCM, KumarK, KoesarieK, et al.Visual priming enhances the effects of nonspatial cognitive rehabilitation training on spatial learning after experimental traumatic brain injury. Neurorehab Neural Repair, 2015; 29(9):897–906; doi: 10.1177/1545968315570326
61.
RadabaughHL, CarlsonLJ, O'NeilDA, et al.Abbreviated environmental enrichment confers neurobehavioral, cognitive, and histological benefits in brain-injured female rats. Exp Neurol, 2016; 286:61–68; doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2016.09.015
62.
FarrellR, EvansS, CorbettD. Environmental enrichment enhances recovery of function but exacerbates ischemic cell death. Neuroscience, 2001; 107(4):585–592; doi: 10.1016/S0306-4522(01)00386-4
63.
WoitkeF, BlankA, FleischerAL, et al.Post-stroke environmental enrichment improves neurogenesis and cognitive function and reduces the generation of aberrant neurons in the mouse hippocampus. Cells, 2023; 12(4); doi: 10.3390/cells12040652
64.
LajudN, Díaz-ChávezA, RadabaughHL, et al.Delayed and abbreviated environmental enrichment after brain trauma promotes motor and cognitive recovery that is not contingent on increased neurogenesis. J Neurotrauma, 2019; 36(5):756–767; doi: 10.1089/neu.2018.5866
65.
LiF, GengX, KhanH, et al.Exacerbation of brain injury by post-stroke exercise iIs contingent upon exercise initiation timing. Front Cell Neurosci, 2017; 11:311; doi: 10.3389/fncel.2017.00311
66.
SchmidtA, WellmannJ, SchillingM, et al.Meta-analysis of the efficacy of different training strategies in animal models of ischemic stroke. Stroke, 2014; 45(1):239–247; doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002048
67.
RichterSH, GarnerJP, AuerC, et al.Systematic variation improves reproducibility of animal experiments. Nat Methods, 2010; 7(3):167–168; doi: 10.1038/nmeth0310-167
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
