Infralimbic cortex plays a similar role in the punishment and extinction of instrumental behavior.

• Infralimbic cortex supports expression of both punishment and extinction learning. • Inactivating infralimbic cortex impairs expression of punishment and extinction. • Infralimbic inactivation does not affect response suppression in a two-response design. • Under certain conditions, response suppression does not require infralimbic cortex. Learning to stop responding is a fundamental process in instrumental learning. Animals may learn to stop responding under a variety of conditions that include punishment—where the response earns an aversive stimulus in addition to a reinforcer—and extinction—where a reinforced response now earns nothing at all. Recent research suggests that punishment and extinction may be related manifestations of a common retroactive interference process. In both paradigms, animals learn to stop performing a specific response in a specific context, suggesting direct inhibition of the response by the context. This process may depend on the infralimbic cortex (IL), which has been implicated in a variety of interference-based learning paradigms including extinction and habit learning. Despite the behavioral parallels between extinction and punishment, a corresponding role for IL in punishment has not been identified. Here we report that, in a simple arrangement where either punishment or extinction was conducted in a context that differed from the context in which the behavior was first acquired, IL inactivation reduced response suppression in the inhibitory context, but not responding when it "renewed" in the original context. In a more complex arrangement in which two responses were first trained in different contexts and then extinguished or punished in the opposite one, IL inactivation had no effect. The results advance our understanding of the effects of IL in retroactive interference and the behavioral mechanisms that can produce suppression of a response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]