(a) Food-port entry rate (entries/min) during CS probe period (after CS onset, before first reward delivery), averaged across trials and CSs for each day of Pavlovian conditioning. There was no effect of unilateral lOFC→BLA inhibition during reward delivery on the development of this Pavlovian conditional goal-approach response in either the disconnection or ipsilateral control group (CS x Training: F(3.4,78.6) = 23.07, p<0.0001; CS: F(1,23) = 131.7, p<0.0001; Virus group: F(2,23) = 1.42, p=0.26; Training: F(3.7,85.4) = 3.95, p=0.007; Virus x Training: F(7.4,85.43) = 2.24, p=0.04; Virus x CS: F(2,23) = 1.19, p=0.32; Virus x Training x CS: F(6.8,78.6) = 1.36, p=0.24). **<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, relative to preCS (top, eYFP/mCherry; middle, ipsilateral ArchT/hM4Di; bottom, contralateral ArchT/hM4Di). (b) Lever press rate (presses/min) averaged across levers and across the final 2 days of instrumental conditioning. There was no significant difference in press rate between the control groups and the disconnection group (F(2,23) = 0.30, p=0.75). Circles represent individual subjects. (c). Lever press rate (presses/min) on the lever that earned the same outcome as the presented CS (averaged across trials and across CSs), relative to the press rate on the alternate lever (Different) during the PIT test. Planned comparisons, based on the results detected in Figure 5f, showed that for the contralateral eYFP/mCherry control subjects CS presentation significantly increased responding on the action earning the same reward as that predicted by the presented cue relative to the preCS baseline period (t7 = 3.30, p=0.01). The CSs did not significantly alter responses on the different lever in this group (t7 = 0.58, p=0.58). For the ipsilateral ArchT/hM4Di control subjects, CS presentation increased responding on the Same action relative to both the preCS baseline period (t7 = 3.43, p=0.01) and to the different action during the CS (t7 = 4.51, p=0.003). The CSs also did not significantly alter responses on the different lever in this control group (t7 = 0.67, p=0.52). For the Disconnection (contralateral ArchT/hM4Di) group, the CSs caused a non-discriminate increase in lever pressing relative to the baseline period on both levers (Same: t9 = 2.54, p=0.03; Different: t9 = 3.92, p=0.004). Lines represent individual subjects. (d) Food-port entry rate during CS presentation (averaged across trials and across CSs) during the PIT test. For all groups, CS presentation triggered a similar significant elevation in this goal-approach behavior (CS: F(1,23) = 47.67, p<0.0001; Virus: F(2,23) = 0.86, p=0.44; Virus x CS: F(2,23) = 0.14, p=0.87). Lines represent individual subjects. Contra, contralateral. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.