Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: Circuit directionality for motivation: lateral accumbens-pallidum, but not pallidum-accumbens, connections regulate motivational attraction to reward cues

doi: 10.1101/474387

Figure Lengend Snippet: Each coronal section represents a range of three sections relative to Bregma (B, in mm). Expression for each animal is plotted at 90% transparency and then per-animal expression is overlaid. Sections run anterior (top) to posterior (bottom). A) Expression map of AAV-hSyn-DIO-hM4D(Gi)-mCherry in VP following CAV2-Cre injections in NAcLSh (i.e., VP → NAcLSh inhibition animals; red). B) Expression map of AAV-hSyn-DIO-mCherry in VP (i.e., controls; black).

Article Snippet: The inhibition group received 0.6 µl of AAV-hSyn-DIO-hM4D(Gi)-mCherry (n = 12, AAV5, UNC Vector Core; n = 4, AAV8, Addgene) in the VP and 1.0 µl CAV-Cre or CAV-Cre-GFP in the NAcLSh.

Techniques: Expressing, Inhibition

Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: External Globus Pallidus Arkypallidal Circuit Dynamics Gate Risk-Taking Behavior

doi: 10.64898/2026.03.20.713182

Figure Lengend Snippet: (a) Experimental diagram. Npas1-Cre-TdTomato mice received bilateral GPe injections of Cre-dependent AAV8-hSyn-DIO-hM4D(Gi)-mCherry or AAV8-hSyn-DIO-hM3D(Gq)-mCherry, with Cre-negative littermates serving as controls. All animals received C21 prior to testing, ensuring equivalent drug exposure across groups. Mice were tested on the elevated plus maze (EPM) 5 weeks post-surgery. Behavioral sessions were video-recorded for subsequent analysis. (b) Time spent in closed arms, center, and open arms during the EPM shows the expected preference for closed arms across all groups, with no effect of GPe NPAS1 manipulation on arm occupancy (two-way mixed ANOVA, maze compartment F (2,52) = 122.8, p = 2.003e-20; group F (2,26) = 1.546, p = 0.2319). (c) Number of open-arm entries does not differ across groups, indicating no effect of GPe NPAS1 manipulation on exploration of these areas (ANOVA, group F (2,26) = 1.048, p = 0.365). (d) Percent time spent in the open arms in the EPM is comparable across control, hM4D(Gi), and hM3D(Gq) mice, consistent with preserved global EPM performance (ANOVA, group F (2,55) = 0.4928, p = 0.6136). (e) Empirical cumulative distribution functions (ECDFs) of frame-wise horizontal movement in the open arms during the EPM show highly overlapping movement distributions across groups, illustrating the absence of gross shifts in locomotor behavior within high-risk regions of the maze. Pairwise Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests detected statistically significant but very small distributional differences (KS D = 0.02–0.05; FDR-corrected p < 0.001), consistent with negligible effect sizes that do not reflect meaningful differences in open-arm movement dynamics. (f) Distance traveled (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 0.8741, p = 0.9131), (g) speed (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 0.8742, p = 0.9129), and (h) acceleration (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 1.037, p = 0.3419) over time are comparable across control, hM4D(Gi), and hM3D(Gq) mice, indicating preserved global locomotor output across the session. Frame-wise polar histograms of heading direction during EPM show (i) control mice exhibit a modest but significant preference for a closed-arm-oriented heading (Rayleigh test, r = 0.005399, p = 0.001871). (j) hM4D(Gi) mice show a statistically significant, strong preferred closed arm heading (Rayleigh test, r = 0.01707, p = 1.225e-16). (k) In contrast, GPe NPAS1 hM4D(Gq) mice do not exhibit a statistically significant preferred heading orientation (Rayleigh test, r = 0.001264, p = 0.7505). (l) Pose features extracted from video tracking show bound box area across time was decreased for hM3D(Gq) mice compared to control mice across all EPM areas (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 1.180, p = 0.03497; post hoc control v hM3D(Gq) p = 0.03348). (m) Similarly, box aspect ratio over time was decreased for hM3D(Gq) mice compared to control mice (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 1.181, p = 0.03486; post hoc control v hM3D(Gq) p = 0.04464). (n) There were no group differences in the change in aspect ratio across time (two-way mixed ANOVA, group x time F (238,3094) = 0.08639, p = 0.06231). Dots represent individual data points, error bars or shaded bands represent standard error of the mean (SEM). For polar plots, 32 bins were computed to generate 11.25 degree bars for histogram densities.

Article Snippet: The Gi/o-coupled DREADD vector AAV8-hSyn-DIO-hM4D(Gi)-mCherry (plasmid #44362) and the Gq-coupled DREADD vector AAV8-hSyn-DIO-hM3D(Gq)-mCherry (plasmid #44361) were obtained from Addgene.

Techniques: Control

Journal: Molecular Therapy

Article Title: Minimizing the Inhibitory Effect of Neutralizing Antibody for Efficient Gene Expression in the Liver With Adeno-associated Virus 8 Vectors

doi: 10.1038/mt.2012.258

Figure Lengend Snippet: Expression of FIX T262A in macaques after direct vector injection into portal veins. Macaques (n = 3) were subjected to direct injection of AAV8 vector into the portal vein. Concentrations of FIX T262A in macaque plasma samples (macaque #26, open triangles; #27, open circles; #29, closed squares) were measured by ELISA. AAV, adeno-associated virus; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; FIX, factor IX.

Article Snippet: Quantitation of AAV8 vector DNA in macaque tissues was performed using quantitative PCR assays using a StepOnePlus instrument (Applied Biosystems Japan).

Techniques: Expressing, Plasmid Preparation, Injection, Clinical Proteomics, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Virus