Evidence for absence of links between striatal dopamine synthesis capacity and working memory capacity, spontaneous eye-blink rate, and trait impulsivity

  1. Ruben van den Bosch  Is a corresponding author
  2. Frank H Hezemans
  3. Jessica I Määttä
  4. Lieke Hofmans
  5. Danae Papadopetraki
  6. Robbert-Jan Verkes
  7. Andre F Marquand
  8. Jan Booij
  9. Roshan Cools
  1. Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands
  2. Stockholm University, Sweden
  3. University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
  4. Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Netherlands
  5. Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Netherlands

Abstract

Individual differences in striatal dopamine synthesis capacity have been associated with working memory capacity, trait impulsivity and spontaneous eye-blink rate (sEBR), as measured with readily available and easily administered, 'off-the-shelf' tests. Such findings have raised the suggestion that individual variation in dopamine synthesis capacity, estimated with expensive and invasive brain positron emission tomography (PET) scans, can be approximated with simple, more pragmatic tests. However, direct evidence for the relationship between these simple trait measures and striatal dopamine synthesis capacity has been limited and inconclusive. We measured striatal dopamine synthesis capacity using [18F]-FDOPA PET in a large sample of healthy volunteers (N=94) and assessed the correlation with simple, short tests of working memory capacity, trait impulsivity, and sEBR. We additionally explored the relationship with an index of subjective reward sensitivity. None of these trait measures correlated significantly with striatal dopamine synthesis capacity, nor did they have out-of-sample predictive power. Bayes Factor analyses indicated the evidence was in favour of absence of correlations for all but subjective reward sensitivity. These results warrant caution for using these off-the-shelf trait measures as proxies of striatal dopamine synthesis capacity.

Data availability

The minimally processed data used in this study and the overarching project it is part of are available from the Donders Institute Data Repository (https://doi.org/10.34973/wn51-ej53; custom data use agreement RU-DI-HD-1.0). The final data derivatives relevant to the current work, as well as all code for data analysis and figures creation, are available from a separate collection on the Donders Institute Data Repository (https://doi.org/10.34973/0sce-z290).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ruben van den Bosch

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    ruben.vandenbosch@donders.ru.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3994-8291
  2. Frank H Hezemans

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jessica I Määttä

    Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Lieke Hofmans

    Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Danae Papadopetraki

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Robbert-Jan Verkes

    Department of Psychiatry, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Andre F Marquand

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jan Booij

    Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Roshan Cools

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (453-14-015)

  • Roshan Cools

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (945539)

  • Roshan Cools

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: All participants provided written informed consent. The study was approved by the local ethics committee ("Commissie Mensgebonden Onderzoek", CMO region Arnhem-Nijmegen, The Netherlands: protocol NL57538.091.16).

Copyright

© 2023, van den Bosch et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,199
    views
  • 124
    downloads
  • 12
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ruben van den Bosch
  2. Frank H Hezemans
  3. Jessica I Määttä
  4. Lieke Hofmans
  5. Danae Papadopetraki
  6. Robbert-Jan Verkes
  7. Andre F Marquand
  8. Jan Booij
  9. Roshan Cools
(2023)
Evidence for absence of links between striatal dopamine synthesis capacity and working memory capacity, spontaneous eye-blink rate, and trait impulsivity
eLife 12:e83161.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83161

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83161

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Jacob A Miller
    Insight

    When navigating environments with changing rules, human brain circuits flexibly adapt how and where we retain information to help us achieve our immediate goals.

    1. Neuroscience
    Franziska Auer, Katherine Nardone ... David Schoppik
    Research Article

    Cerebellar dysfunction leads to postural instability. Recent work in freely moving rodents has transformed investigations of cerebellar contributions to posture. However, the combined complexity of terrestrial locomotion and the rodent cerebellum motivate new approaches to perturb cerebellar function in simpler vertebrates. Here, we adapted a validated chemogenetic tool (TRPV1/capsaicin) to describe the role of Purkinje cells — the output neurons of the cerebellar cortex — as larval zebrafish swam freely in depth. We achieved both bidirectional control (activation and ablation) of Purkinje cells while performing quantitative high-throughput assessment of posture and locomotion. Activation modified postural control in the pitch (nose-up/nose-down) axis. Similarly, ablations disrupted pitch-axis posture and fin-body coordination responsible for climbs. Postural disruption was more widespread in older larvae, offering a window into emergent roles for the developing cerebellum in the control of posture. Finally, we found that activity in Purkinje cells could individually and collectively encode tilt direction, a key feature of postural control neurons. Our findings delineate an expected role for the cerebellum in postural control and vestibular sensation in larval zebrafish, establishing the validity of TRPV1/capsaicin-mediated perturbations in a simple, genetically tractable vertebrate. Moreover, by comparing the contributions of Purkinje cell ablations to posture in time, we uncover signatures of emerging cerebellar control of posture across early development. This work takes a major step towards understanding an ancestral role of the cerebellum in regulating postural maturation.