In Figure 5B (bottom), we took advantage of the larger MK-8776 mouse number of traces to smooth the data with a narrower, 15 ms rectangular filter. Research supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH077970, and predoctoral fellowships from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health (NS655982). We thank Karen MacLeod, Elizabeth Montgomery, Stefanie Tokiyama, Lazslo Bocskai, Darrell

Floyd, Dirk Kleinhesselink, Ken McGary, and Scott Ruffner for technical assistance. Finally, we thank colleagues for helpful comments and discussions. “
“The outcomes expected from various actions vary in multiple dimensions and can often create a conflict. Accordingly, the ability to combine appropriately the information about multiple attributes of

action outcomes is critical for choosing the actions most beneficial to the animal. For example, during intertemporal choice between a small but more immediate reward and a large but more delayed reward, people and animals often choose the smaller reward if the difference in magnitude is too small or if the difference in delay is sufficiently large. This check details indicates that the subjective value of a delayed reward is reduced compared to when the same reward is immediately available. Formally, how steeply the reward value decreases with its delay is given by a temporal discount function. A temporally discounted value for a delayed reward is then given by the magnitude of reward multiplied by its discount function. Humans and many other species of animals tend to choose the reward with the maximum temporally discounted value (Frederick et al., 2002, Green and Myerson, 2004, Kalenscher and Pennartz, 2008 and Hwang et al., 2009). Disruption in this ability to combine appropriately the information about the magnitude and delay of reward characterizes the maladaptive choice behaviors observed in many psychiatric disorders (Madden et al., 1997, Vuchinich and Simpson, 1998,

Mitchell, 1999, Kirby and Petry, 2004 and Reynolds, 2006). Nevertheless, how Unoprostone temporally discounted values are computed in the brain and used for decision making is not well understood. In particular, previous neuroimaging and lesion studies have highlighted the role of the basal ganglia in decision making involving temporal delays (Cardinal et al., 2001, McClure et al., 2004, McClure et al., 2007, Tanaka et al., 2004, Hariri et al., 2006, Kable and Glimcher, 2007, Wittmann et al., 2007, Weber and Huettel, 2008, Gregorios-Pippas et al., 2009, Pine et al., 2009, Luhmann et al., 2008, Ballard and Knutson, 2009, Bickel et al., 2009 and Xu et al., 2009), but precisely how its different subdivisions contribute to intertemporal choice is not clear. Although previous neurophysiological studies in primates (Apicella et al., 1991, Schultz et al., 1992, Williams et al., 1993, Bowman et al., 1996, Hassani et al.