At the

moment, the simplicity of the neuronal activity hypothesis is most compelling and potentially testable by precise depth-dependent electrophysiological measures in these areas ( Maier et al., 2010). The authors further go on to suggest an extremely intriguing possibility: that these hemodynamics not only apply to negative activation-induced BOLD signal changes at steady state, but also to the negative BOLD signal changes that occur following cessation of activation, known as the post-stimulus undershoot (Chen and Pike, 2009). Data suggest that CBV remains elevated in middle layers while GSK126 chemical structure CBV and CBF at the surface quickly return to baseline. Might spatially adjacent as well as post-stimulus activity therefore be related to inhibitory neuronal activity? This seems quite possible, and to test this hypothesis, it would be relatively easy to collect layer-specific postundershoot

data from Palbociclib clinical trial a variety of cortical areas. As is often the case with cutting-edge work such as this, more questions are raised than answered. In this case, these questions may lead to avenues of investigation that could explain more fully the nature of the BOLD and hemodynamic response. While the initial aim of this paper, toward using laminar profile activation (Chen et al., 2012; Olman et al., 2012; Siero et al., 2011; Uğurbil, 2012) to disentangle feedforward, feedback, excitatory, and inhibitory processing, may still remain somewhat elusive until the underlying hemodynamic processes are fully resolved, the study opens up exciting new questions about the nature of the BOLD response. In terms of implications for human fMRI, while VASO is certainly an option for

human investigation, the emergence of human use of ferumoxytol (Qiu et al., 2012) potentially offers an avenue for measurement of CBV changes in humans with much higher sensitivity than previously possible. Such technical advances should allow oxyclozanide researchers to address these questions with a wider array of activation paradigms in humans. “
“Nucleus accumbens dopamine (DA) has been implicated in several behavioral functions related to motivation. Yet the specifics of this involvement are complex and at times can be difficult to disentangle. An important consideration in interpreting these findings is the ability to distinguish between diverse aspects of motivational function that are differentially affected by dopaminergic manipulations. Although ventral tegmental neurons have traditionally been labeled “reward” neurons and mesolimbic DA referred to as the “reward” system, this vague generalization is not matched by the specific findings that have been observed. The scientific meaning of the term “reward” is unclear, and its relation to concepts such as reinforcement and motivation is often ill defined.