Differential roles of hippocampal metabotropic glutamate receptors 1 and 5 in inhibitory avoidance learning

Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGlu1 and 5) have been implicated in synaptic plasticity and learning and memory. However, much of our understanding of how these receptors in different brain regions contribute to distinct memory stages in different learning tasks remains incomplete. The present study investigated the effects of the mGlu5 receptor antagonist, 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP), and mGlu1 receptor antagonist, (S)-(+)-alpha-amino-4-carboxy-2-methylbenzene-acetic acid (LY 367385) in the dorsal hippocampus on the consolidation and extinction of memory for inhibitory avoidance learning. Male, Sprague-Dawley rats were trained in a single-trial step-down inhibitory avoidance task. MPEP, LY 367385 or saline were infused bilaterally into the CA1 region immediately after training or immediately after the first retention test which was given 24h after training. Rats receiving MPEP (1.5 or 5.0 microg/side) or LY 367385 (0.7 or 2.0 microg/side) infusion exhibited a dose-dependent decrease in retention when tested 24h later. MPEP was ineffective while LY 367385 significantly attenuated extinction when injected after the first retention test using an extinction procedure. These findings indicate a selective participation of hippocampal group I mGlu receptors in memory processing in this task.     

Contributions of area Te2 to rat recognition memory

Ablations and local intracerebral infusions were used to determine the role of rat temporal association cortex (area Te2) in object recognition memory, so that this role might be compared with that of the adjacent perirhinal cortex (PRH). Bilateral lesions of Te2 impaired recognition memory measured by preferential exploration of a novel rather than a familiar object at delays ≥20 min but not after a 5-min delay. Local infusion bilaterally into Te2 of (1) CNQX to block AMPA/kainate receptors or (2) lidocaine to block axonal transmission or (3) AP5, an NMDA receptor antagonist, impaired recognition memory after a 24-h but not a 20-min delay. In PRH all these manipulations impair recognition memory after a 20-min as well as a 24-h delay. UBP302, a GluK1 kainate receptor antagonist, impaired recognition memory after a 24-h but not a 20-min delay, contrasting with its action in PRH where it impairs only shorter-term (20 min) recognition memory. Also in contrast to PRH, infusion of the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine was without effect. The Te2 impairments could not readily be ascribed to perceptual deficits. Hence, Te2 is essential for object recognition memory at delays >5 or 20 min. Thus, at long delays both area Te2 and PRH are necessary for object recognition memory.     

Differing time dependencies of object recognition memory impairments produced by nicotinic and muscarinic cholinergic antagonism in perirhinal cortex

The roles of muscarinic and nicotinic cholinergic receptors in perirhinal cortex in object recognition memory were compared. Rats' discrimination of a novel object preference test (NOP) test was measured after either systemic or local infusion into the perirhinal cortex of the nicotinic receptor antagonist methyllycaconitine (MLA), which targets alpha-7 (α7) amongst other nicotinic receptors or the muscarinic receptor antagonists scopolamine, AFDX-384, and pirenzepine. Methyllycaconitine administered systemically or intraperirhinally before acquisition impaired recognition memory tested after a 24-h, but not a 20-min delay. In contrast, all three muscarinic antagonists produced a similar, unusual pattern of impairment with amnesia after a 20-min delay, but remembrance after a 24-h delay. Thus, the amnesic effects of nicotinic and muscarinic antagonism were doubly dissociated across the 20-min and 24-h delays. The same pattern of shorter-term but not longer-term memory impairment was found for scopolamine whether the object preference test was carried out in a square arena or a Y-maze and whether rats of the Dark Agouti or Lister-hooded strains were used. Coinfusion of MLA and either scopolamine or AFDX-384 produced an impairment profile matching that for MLA. Hence, the antagonists did not act additively when coadministered. These findings establish an important role in recognition memory for both nicotinic and muscarinic cholinergic receptors in perirhinal cortex, and provide a challenge to simple ideas about the role of cholinergic processes in recognition memory: The effects of muscarinic and nicotinic antagonism are neither independent nor additive.     

Retrieval dynamics in recognition and list discrimination: Further evidence of separate processes of familiarity and recall

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that the time course of retrieval from memory is different for familiarity and recall. The response-signal method was used to compare memory retrieval dynamics in yes-no recognition memory, as a measure of familiarity, with those of list discrimination, as a measure of contextual recall. Responses were always made with regard to membership in two previous study lists. In Experiment 1 an exclusion task requiring positive responses to words from one list and negative responses to new words and words from the nontarget list was used. In Experiment 2, recognition and list discrimination were separate tasks. Retrieval curves from both experiments were consistent, showing that the minimal retrieval time for recognition was about 100 msec faster than that for list discrimination. Repetition affected asymptotic performance but had no reliable effects on retrieval dynamics in either the recognition or the list-discrimination task.     

Muscimol,AP5, or scopolamine infused into perirhinal cortex impairs two-choice visual discrimination learning in rats

The perirhinal cortex (PRh) has been strongly implicated in object recognition memory and visual stimulus representation. Studies of object recognition have revealed evidence for the involvement of several neurotransmitter subsystems, including those involving NMDA (N-methyl-d-aspartic acid) and muscarinic cholinergic receptors. In the present study, we assessed the possible involvement of PRh and related receptor subsystems in two-choice visual discrimination learning by Lister Hooded rats tested in touchscreen-equipped operant boxes. In Experiment 1, daily pre-training inactivation of PRh with the GABA_A receptor agonist muscimol (0.5 μg/hemisphere) significantly impaired acquisition of the two-choice visual discrimination. In Experiment 2, daily pre-training blockade of either NMDA or muscarinic receptors in PRh with AP5 (5.9 μg/hemisphere) or scopolamine (10 μg/hemisphere), respectively, impaired task acquisition. These results parallel the findings from object recognition studies and suggest a generality of neurotransmitter receptor involvement underlying the role of PRh in both object recognition memory and visual discrimination learning. The involvement of PRh in both types of tasks may be related to its role in complex visual stimulus representation.     

Differential involvement of mGluR1 and mGluR5 in memory reconsolidation and retrieval in a passive avoidance task in 1-day old chicks

Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) are involved in memory formation. The Ca2+ signal derived from stimulation of IP3 receptors (IP3Rs) via mGluRs, initiates protein synthesis that is required for memory consolidation and reconsolidation. However it has been suggested that different mechanisms are triggered by mGluR1/5 activation in these two processes. It is also not clear whether the transient amnesia observed after blockade of group I mGluRs after a reminder, results from disturbance of memory reconsolidation or temporal impairment of recall. The aim of this study was to examine more closely the role of mGluR1 in memory consolidation and reconsolidation and to detect differences in the participation of mGluR1 and mGluR5 in memory retrieval after initial training and after the remainder of the task. Our results demonstrate, that in chicks performing a one-trial passive avoidance task, antagonists of mGluR1, mGluR5 and IP3R significantly disturb memory consolidation and reconsolidation. Inhibition of mGluR5 and IP3R also impairs memory recall, whereas mGluR1 do not seem to participate in this process. The presented data suggest that activation of mGluR1 and mGluR5 is necessary for the correct course of memory consolidation and reconsolidation, whereas mGluR5 are additionally involved in retrieval processes dependent on Ca2+ release from IP3 activated intracellular stores.     

Exhaustive memory-scanning and familiarity discrimination: Separate mechanisms in recognition memory tasks

Experiment I was a yes-no recognition task with lists of one, two or four items to remember. Each item in the experiment appeared in only one list, and each list was presented only once. One group of subjects performed the task with complex pictures. Their results were incompatible with the hypothesis of exhaustive memory scanning, since the function relating “yes” response latency to list length was not parallel to but steeper than the function for “no” responses. Another group performed the task with words. Their results were consistent with exhaustive memory-scanning. Experiment II was a similar task in which the familiarity was varied of the test items to which the subjects had to respond “no”. That variation affected response latency with pictures but not with words. From these results and from a consideration of relevant neurological data, the hypothesis is advanced that familiarity discrimination and exhaustive memory-scanning are separate mechanisms.     

DHPG activation of group 1 mGluRs in BLA enhances fear conditioning

Group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors are known to play an important role in both synaptic plasticity and memory. We show that activating these receptors prior to fear conditioning by infusing the group 1 mGluR agonist, (R.S.)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG), into the basolateral region of the amygdala (BLA) of adult Sprague–Dawley rats enhances freezing normally supported by a weak footshock. This effect of DHPG was blocked when it was co-infused with either the general group 1 mGluR1 antagonist, (R,S)-1-aminoindan-1,5 dicarboxylic acid (AIDA), or with the selective mGluR5 antagonist, 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP). These results support previous findings by Rodrigues and colleagues that mGluR5s in the lateral region of the amygdala make an import contribution to fear conditioning. More importantly, they support the general ideas embedded in the concept of metaplasticity, as per Abraham, and the synaptic-tagging hypothesis per Frey and Morris—that the processes that specify the content of experience can be experimentally separated from those needed to acquire the memory.The last decade has seen an increased appreciation of the view that the plasticity state of neurons—their ability to be modified by experience—is not fixed. Instead, the effect of experience depends on the physiological or biochemical state of the neurons or synapses that receive and store information contained in the experience, and this state is variable. This perspective is captured by the concept called “metaplasticity” (Abraham and Bear 1996; Abraham and Tate 1997; Abraham 2008), which recognizes that prior events can change the general plasticity or modifiability of neurons and synapses that will potentially store information contained in a subsequent target experience. This idea is also embedded in the synaptic-tagging hypothesis (Frey and Morris 1997, 1998) that will be described in some detail in the Discussion section. This view is important because it recognizes that the processes that specify the content of experience can be experimentally separated from those that are needed to store the memory for the experience.As reviewed by Abraham (2008), the range of prior events that can potentially determine a neuron''s state of plasticity is quite large and can be mediated by their effects on many components of the machinery that supports changes in synaptic strength. They include modification in NMDA-receptor function, AMPA-receptor trafficking, neuronal excitability, and epigenetic modifications.One way that the potential for plasticity can be altered is by activation of group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1s and mGlur5s) (Abraham 2008). A number of reports based on the in vitro long-term potentiation (LTP) methodology suggest that activating this class of receptors prior to the delivery of a relatively weak inducing stimulus can transform a normally short-lasting form of LTP into a more persistent form (Cohen and Abraham 1996; Cohen et al. 1998; Raymond et al. 2000). For example, an infusion of (R.S.)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG), a group 1 mGluR agonist, into the bathing medium 30 min prior to the delivery of a weak inducing stimulus can significantly enhance the persistence of the resulting LTP, while having no effect on the baseline response (Cohen et al. 1998; Raymond et al. 2000). This effect of DHPG, however, is blocked (Raymond et al. 2000) when its administration is accompanied by an infusion of the group 1 mGluR antagonist, (R,S)-1-aminoindan-1,5 dicarboxylic acid (AIDA).Group 1 mGluRs also have been implicated in fear conditioning. For example, Rodrigues et al. (2002) reported that one subtype, mGluR5, is localized in dendrites and spines in neurons in the lateral nucleus of the amygdala, and fear conditioning can be significantly impaired if the mGluR5 antagonist, 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP), is infused into the lateral nucleus prior to conditioning.These findings, from the studies of synaptic plasticity and fear conditioning, provide the empirical basis for the hypothesis that motivates the experiments reported here—that the plasticity potential of neurons in the amygdala that support fear conditioning can be increased by activating group 1 mGluRs prior to the conditioning experience.To evaluate this idea, we followed a strategy similar to that used to study the role of mGluRs in LTP (Cohen and Abraham 1996; Cohen et al. 1998; Raymond et al. 2000). In these in vitro LTP experiments, a relatively weak inducing stimulus was used to generate a short-lasting LTP. Infusing the group 1 agonist DHPG prior to the delivery of the inducing stimulus transformed this short-lasting LTP into a more persistent form. Their results suggest that the activation of group 1 mGluR1 receptors independently initiates processes that make an important contribution to long-lasting LTP. To apply this strategy to fear conditioning, we used a very low level of shock—one that by itself produced an almost undetectable level of conditioned fear (as measured by freezing, the innate defensive response of rodents). We then determined if the activation of group 1 mGluRs prior to the conditioning experience would transform this outcome and produce a stronger level of freezing. DPHG was infused into the basolateral region of the amygdala (BLA) to activate the mGluRs.     

Modulatory influence of dopamine receptors on consolidation of object recognition memory

The role of dopamine receptors in regulating the formation of recognition memory remains poorly understood. Here we show the effects of systemic administration of dopamine receptor agonists and antagonists on the formation of memory for novel object recognition in rats. In Experiment I, rats received an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of vehicle, the selective D1 receptor agonist SKF38393 (1.0 and 5.0mg/kg), or the D2 receptor agonist quinpirole (1.0 and 5.0mg/kg) immediately after training. In Experiment II, rats received an injection of vehicle, the dopamine receptor antagonist SCH23390 (0.1 and 0.05 mg/kg), or the D2 receptor antagonist raclopride (0.5 and 0.1mg/kg) before training, followed by an injection of vehicle or the nonselective dopamine receptor agonist apomorphine (0.05 mg/kg) immediately after training. SKF38393 at 5mg/kg produced an enhancement of novel object recognition memory measured at both 24 and 72 h after training, whereas the dose of 10mg/kg impaired 24-h retention. Posttraining administration of quinpirole did not affect 24-h retention. Apomorphine enhanced memory in rats given pretraining raclopride, suggesting that the effect was mediated by selective activation of D1 receptors. The results indicate that activation of D1 receptors can enhance recognition memory consolidation. Importantly, pharmacological activation of D1 receptors enhanced novel object recognition memory even under conditions in which control rats showed significant retention.     

Color and context: An ERP study on intrinsic and extrinsic feature binding in episodic memory

Episodic memory for intrinsic item and extrinsic context information is postulated to rely on two distinct types of representation: object and episodic tokens. These provide the basis for familiarity and recollection, respectively. Electrophysiological indices of these processes (ERP old-new effects) were used together with behavioral data to test these assumptions. We manipulated an intrinsic object feature (color; Experiment 1) and a contextual feature (background; Experiments 1 and 2). In an inclusion task (Experiment 1), the study-test manipulation of color affected object recognition performance and modulated ERP old-new effects associated with both familiarity and recollection. In contrast, a contextual manipulation had no effect, although both intrinsic and extrinsic information was available in a direct feature (source memory) test. When made task relevant (exclusion task; Experiment 2), however, context affected the ERP recollection effect, while still leaving the ERP familiarity effect uninfluenced. We conclude that intrinsic features bound in object tokens are involuntarily processed during object recognition, thus influencing familiarity, whereas context features bound in episodic tokens are voluntarily accessed, exclusively influencing recollection. Figures depicting all the electrodes analyzed are available in an online supplement at www.psychonomic.org/archive.     

Recognizing familiar and unfamiliar faces

These experiments addressed why, in episodic-memory tests, familiar faces are recognized better than unfamiliar faces. Memory for faces of well-known public figures and unfamiliar persons was tested, not only with old/new recognition tests, in which initially viewed faces were discriminated from dis tractors, but also with tests of memory for specific information. These included: detail recall, in which a masked feature had to be described; orientation recognition, in which discrimination between originally seen faces and mirror-image reversals was required; and recognition and recall of labels for the public figures. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that memory for orientation and featural details was not robustly related either to facial familiarity or to old/new recognition rates. Experiment 3 showed that memory for labels was not the exclusive determinant of the famous-face advantage in recognition, since famous faces were highly recognizable even they were not labelable or when labels were forgotten. These results suggest that the familiarity effect, and face recognition in general, may reflect a nonverbal memory representation that is relatively abstract.     

Sleep deprivation impairs object recognition in mice

Many studies in animals and humans suggest that sleep facilitates learning, memory consolidation, and retrieval. Moreover, sleep deprivation (SD) incurred after learning, impaired memory in humans, mice, rats, and hamsters. We investigated the importance of sleep and its timing in an object recognition task in OF1 mice subjected to 6h SD either immediately after the acquisition phase (0-6 SD) or 6h later (7-12 SD), and in corresponding undisturbed controls. Motor activity was continuously recorded with infrared sensors. All groups explored two familiar, previously encountered objects to a similar extent, both at the end of the acquisition phase and 24h later during the test phase, indicating intact familiarity detection. During the test phase 0-6 SD mice failed to discriminate between the single novel and the two familiar objects. In contrast, the 7-12 SD group and the two control groups explored the novel object significantly longer than the two familiar objects. Plasma corticosterone levels determined after SD did not differ from time-matched undisturbed controls, but were significantly below the level measured after learning alone. ACTH did not differ between the groups. Therefore, it is unlikely that stress contributed to the memory impairment. We conclude that the loss of sleep and the activities the mice engaged in during the SD, impaired recognition memory retrieval, when they occurred immediately after acquisition. The delayed SD enabled memory consolidation during the 6h when the mice were allowed to sleep, and had no detrimental effect on memory. Neither SD schedule impaired object familiarity processing, suggesting that only specific cognitive abilities were sensitive to the intervention. Sleep may either actively promote memory formation, or alternatively, sleep may provide optimal conditions of non-interference for consolidation.     

Differential effects of list strength on recollection and familiarity

Numerous studies have found a null list strength effect (LSE) for recognition sensitivity: Strengthening memory traces associated with some studied items does not impair recognition of nonstrengthened studied items. In Experiment 1, the author found a LSE using receiver operating characteristic-based measures of recognition sensitivity. To account for the discrepancy between this and prior research, the author (a) argues that a LSE occurs for recollection but not for discrimination based on familiarity, and (b) presents self-report data consistent with this hypothesis. Experiment 2 tested the dual-process hypothesis more directly, using switched-plurality (SP) lures to isolate the contribution of recollection. There was a significant LSE for comparisons involving SP lures; the LSE for discrimination of studied items and nominally unrelated lures (which can be supported by familiarity) was not significant.     

Scopolamine infused into perirhinal cortex improves object recognition memory by blocking the acquisition of interfering object information

In a previous study, we reported apparently paradoxical facilitation of object recognition memory following infusions of the cholinergic muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine into the perirhinal cortex (PRh) of rats. We attributed these effects to the blockade by scopolamine of the acquisition of interfering information. The present study tested this possibility directly by modifying the spontaneous object recognition memory task to allow the presentation of a potentially interfering object either before the sample phase or in the retention delay between the sample and choice phases. Presentation of an object between the sample and choice phases disrupted subsequent recognition of the sample object (retroactive interference), and intra-PRh infusions of scopolamine prior to the presentation of the irrelevant object prevented this retroactive interference effect. Moreover, presentation of an irrelevant object prior to the sample phase interfered proactively with sample object recognition, and intra-PRh infusions of scopolamine prior to the presentation of the pre-sample object prevented this proactive interference effect. These results suggest that blocking muscarinic cholinergic receptors in PRh can disrupt the acquisition of potentially interfering object information, thereby facilitating object recognition memory. This finding provides further, strong evidence that acetylcholine is important for the acquisition of object information in PRh.     

Effects of fornix transection on spontaneous and trained non-matching by monkeys

Three monkeys with fornix transection and three normal control monkeys performed a series of tasks which were variations of delayed non-matching. Experiment 1 showed that even at short retention intervals fornix transection impaired the spontaneous tendency to explore novel objects. Experiment 2 provided differential reward for non-matching and showed that the fornix-transected monkeys learned and performed non-matching normally even though the sample-match retention intervals were long throughout the experiment. Experiment 3 showed that non-matching performance was transiently more disrupted in fornix-transected than in normal monkeys when the testing procedure was changed, in a variety of ways, while maintaining the basic non-match rule. Experiment 4 required the monkeys to discriminate objects they had displaced from objects they had seen but not displaced; fornix transection produced in this task a substantial and stable impairment. These four experiments require a revised interpretation of the effects of fornix transection upon recognition memory and exploration. Particularly they contradict the hypothesis, suggested by previous experiments, that fornix transection produces a defect in discrimination of stimulus familiarity in long-term but not in short-term memory. They suggest rather that fornix transection impairs memory of instrumental responses.     

Priming and Recognition of Human Motion Patterns

Left-right orientation and size incongruence is known to affect recognition memory for objects but not object priming. In the present study, the effects of study-test changes in left-right orientation and size on old-new recognition decisions and long-term priming of human motion patterns were examined. Experiment 1 showed effects of orientation incongruence on both recognition and priming. Experiment 2 showed an effectof size incongruence on recognition memory but not on priming. It is suggested that the representations of human actions that underlie human motion priming are on a level that preserve orientation, possibly because of the importance of dynamic information for perceiving motion patterns or because encoding of human motion is governed by a body schema (e.g. Reed & Farah, 1995). In contrast, low-level metric information such as size is inconsequential to priming because priming involves identification of shape, which is not affected by size transformations. The effect of size on recognition memory, on the other hand, shows thatexplicitrecognition decisions may draw on any available episodic information, including metric attributes, to make an old new discrimination.     

Word attributes and lateralization revisited: Implications for dual coding and discrete versus continuous processing

Three attributes of words are their imageability, concreteness, and familiarity. From a literature review and several experiments, I previously concluded (Boles, 1983a) that only familiarity affects the overall near-threshold recognition of words, and that none of the attributes affects right-visual-field superiority for word recognition. Here these conclusions are modified by two experiments demonstrating a critical mediating influence of intentional versus incidental memory instructions. In Experiment 1, subjects were instructed to remember the words they were shown, for subsequent recall. The results showed effects of both imageability and familiarity on overall recognition, as well as an effect of imageability on lateralization. In Experiment 2, word-memory instructions were deleted and the results essentially reinstated the findings of Boles (1983a). It is concluded that right-hemisphere imagery processes can participate in word recognition under intentional memory instructions. Within the dual coding theory (Paivio, 1971), the results argue that both discrete and continuous processing modes are available, that the modes can be used strategically, and that continuous processing can occur prior to response stages.     

Critical role of the cholinergic system for object-in-place associative recognition memory

Object-in-place memory, which relies on the formation of associations between an object and the place in which it was encountered, depends upon a neural circuit comprising the perirhinal (PRH) and medial prefrontal (mPFC) cortices. This study examined the contribution of muscarinic cholinergic neurotransmission within this circuit to such object-in-place associative memory. Intracerebral administration of scopolamine in the PRH or mPFC impaired memory acquisition, but not retrieval and importantly we showed that unilateral blockade of muscarinic receptors simultaneously in both regions in opposite hemispheres, significantly impaired performance. Thus, object-in-place associative memory depends upon cholinergic modulation of neurones within the PRH-PFC circuit.Recognition memory enables individuals to judge whether stimuli have been encountered before. In its most basic form such judgments may be made on the basis of simply whether a stimulus is familiar or novel (familiarity discrimination). However, these judgments may also be made using associations formed between a stimulus and the location or environmental setting in which it was previously encountered. Such object-in-place associative memory in animals is of particular interest as it is acquired rapidly and it requires the integration of object and spatial information and thus has been described as an analog of human episodic memory (Wilson et al. 2008).The perirhinal cortex (PRH) in the medial temporal lobe is a critical neural structure for object recognition and object-in-place associative memory (Bussey et al. 2000; Barker et al. 2007), but unlike object recognition, this memory process is also dependent on the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) (Kesner and Ragozzino 2003; Browning et al. 2005; Barker et al. 2007) and crucially it has been shown to depend upon a functional interaction between the PRH and mPFC, with each region making a distinct cognitive contribution to the memory formation (Barker et al. 2007; Barker and Warburton 2008).Having identified two neural regions critical for object-in-place associative memory, we now extend our investigations to explore the underlying cellular mechanisms mediating acquisition or retrieval of this memory process. The present study focused on the neurotransmitter acetylcholine as cholinergic innervation of the PRH is crucial for familiarity discrimination (Tang et al. 1997; Easton and Gaffan 2001; Warburton et al. 2003; Abe et al. 2004; Winters and Bussey 2005). In contrast, the role of muscarinic receptor neurotransmission in the PRH or mPFC in object-in-place associative memory is unknown. Further, while it might appear that object recognition memory and object-in-place memory are likely to share common neural substrates, recent data from our laboratory suggest that this may not be the case (Griffiths et al. 2008).To explore the importance of muscarinic cholinergic neurotransmission within the PRH-mPFC circuit for object-in-place memory, rats were implanted with bilateral cannulae aimed at the PRH or mPFC or both regions to allow direct intracerebral administration of scopolamine during distinct stages of an object-in-place task. Memory performance was tested following either a short (5 min) or long (1 h) retention delay. All animal procedures were performed in accordance with the United Kingdom Animals Scientific Procedures Act (1986) and associated guidelines. Details of the surgery, infusion procedures, behavioral testing, and histology have been published previously (Barker and Warburton 2008). Briefly, male DA rats (230–250 g, Bantin and Kingman, UK) housed under a 12-h/12-h light/dark cycle (light phase 18:00–6:00 h), were anesthetized with isoflurane (induction 4%, maintenance 2%–3%) and surgically implanted with bilateral cannulae aimed at either the PRH or mPFC or both regions. After a two-week recovery period all rats were handled, habituated, and then tested in the object-in-place memory task.Sample phase: Each rat was placed in a black open-topped wooden arena (50 × 90 × 100 cm) containing four different objects (A, B, C, D) constructed from “Duplo” (Lego UK Ltd.). The walls of the arena were surrounded with a black cloth to a height of 1.5 m, and the floor covered with sawdust. The objects were placed 15 cm from the walls (see Fig. 1A) and each rat was allowed to explore the objects for 5 min, after which it was removed for the delay (5 min or 1 h). Exploratory behavior was defined as the animal directing its nose toward the object at a distance of <2 cm. Any other behavior, such as looking around while sitting on or resting against the object, was not recorded. Subjects that failed to complete a minimum of 15-s exploration in the sample phase or 10 s of exploration in the test phase were excluded from the analysis.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Diagrammatic representations of the individual infusion sites in each animal. (A) Bilateral medial prefrontal (mPFC) group. (B) Bilateral perirhinal (PRH) group. (C) The mPFC infusion sites of the PRH+mPFC group. (D) The PRH infusion sites of the PRH+mPFC group. All of the infusion sites were within the PRH or mPFC.Test phase: Two of the objects, e.g., B and D, exchanged positions and the subjects were replaced in the arena for 3 min. The time spent exploring the two objects that had changed position was compared to the time spent exploring the two objects that had remained in the same position. If object-in-place memory is intact, subjects spend more time exploring the “moved” objects, compared to the “unmoved” objects. Scopolamine hydrobromide (Sigma-Aldrich) dissolved in sterile 0.9% saline solution was administered at a dose of 10 μg/μL per hemisphere (Schroeder and Packard 2002; Warburton et al. 2003; Winters et al. 2006); control infusions consisted of saline. The infusions were given either 15 min before the sample phase or 15 min before the test phase. At the end of the experiment, each rat was anesthetized and perfused transcardially. Coronal brain sections (40 μm) were stained with cresyl-violet to verify the cannulae locations. All the rats in the PRH group had the tip of the bilateral cannulae in the PRH and all the rats in the mPFC group had tips in the ventral portion of the prelimbic or dorsal portion of the infralimbic region of the prefrontal cortex (Fig. 1B). From unpublished observations, using Indian ink and radiolabeled scopolamine, the region infused is estimated to be 1–1.5 mm³, and largely confined to perirhinal cortex or the prelimbic/infralimbic regions of the prefrontal cortex. This spread is consistent with previously quoted results in other brain regions (Martin 1991; Izquierdo et al. 2000; Attwell et al. 2001). Figure 2, A and B show the performance of the rats receiving bilateral infusions of scopolamine or vehicle into either the PRH (n = 12) or mPFC (n = 12) 15 min prior to the sample phase. After a minimum of 48 h, vehicle or scopolamine was infused in a cross-over design and the animal retested using different objects. A three-way ANOVA (drug × region × delay) showed that scopolamine infusion into either region significantly impaired the acquisition of object-in-place memory (main effect of drug F _(1,35) = 63.87, P < 0.001). The magnitude of the deficit was similar irrespective of the region into which scopolamine was infused (region F _(1,35) < 1.0) or the delay employed (delay F _(1,35) < 1.0). Further analyses to examine whether individual groups discriminated between the objects, using a within subjects t-test (two-tailed), confirmed that vehicle-treated animals in the PRH and mPFC groups showed a significant preference for the moved objects over the objects that had remained in the same position, irrespective of the retention delay (PRH 5 min t ₍₉₎ = 2.96, P < 0.02; 1 h t ₍₁₀₎ = 5.71, P < 0.001: mPFC 5 min t ₍₅₎ = 5.47, P < 0.005; 1 h t ₍₁₁₎ = 9.89, P < 0.001), while scopolamine infusion into the PRH or mPFC significantly disrupted the animal''s ability to discriminate (PRH 5min t ₍₉₎ = 0.13, P = 0.9; 1 h t ₍₁₀₎ = 0.92, P = 0.38: mPFC 5 min t ₍₅₎ = 0.051, P = 0.961; 1 h t ₍₁₁₎ = 0.68, P = 0.51). Scopolamine was without effect on the total amount of exploration completed in the sample or test phases (all Fs < 1.0).Open in a separate windowFigure 2.Discrimination between the objects was calculated using a discrimination ratio, which takes into account individual differences in the total amount of exploration. The discrimination ratio is calculated as follows: the difference in time spent by each animal exploring objects that changed position compared to the objects that remained in the same position divided by the total time spent exploring all objects. (A) Infusion of scopolamine (Scop) into the perirhinal cortex (PRH) significantly impaired performance in the object-in-place task following a 5 min and a 1 h delay. (B) Infusion of scopolamine (Scop) into the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) significantly impaired performance in the object-in-place task following a 5 min and a 1 h delay. Illustrated for each group is the mean (+ SEM) discrimination ratio. * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; and *** P < 0.001 difference between groups.It could be argued that the impairment produced by intracortical infusions of scopolamine following a short delay, reflects an effect on retrieval as well as acquisition. Therefore, we examined the effect of pretest administration of scopolamine (infusion 15 min before the start of the test phase) in the mPFC or PRH following a 1 h delay. No significant impairments were found (mean discrimination ratio ± SEM: PRH vehicle 0.38 ± 0.07, scopolamine 0.46 ± 0.11; mPFC vehicle 0.37 ± 0.08, scopolamine 0.44 ± 0.05), confirmed by a nonsignificant drug effect (F _(1,14) < 1.0, P > 0.1) and nonsignificant drug × area interaction (F _(1,14) = <  1.0, P > 0.1). In addition all groups significantly discriminated between the moved objects compared to objects in the same location (PRH vehicle t ₍₇₎ = 4.95, P < 0.01; PRH scopolamine t ₍₇₎ = 3.45, P < 0.05; mPFC vehicle t ₍₇₎ = 4.26, P < 0.01; mPFC scopolamine t ₍₇₎ = 8.37, P < 0.01). Scopolamine was without effect on the total amount of exploration completed in the test phase (drug × region F _(1,14) < 1.0, P > 0.05).To evaluate the importance of intrahemispheric interactions between these cortical regions and the cholinergic system, a third group of animals had cannulae implanted into both the PRH and mPFC (n = 12). In this experiment the behavioral effects of unilateral scopolamine infusions into the PRH and mPFC in the same hemisphere (Scop Ipsi) were compared with the effects of unilateral scopolamine infusions into opposite hemispheres (Scop Contra). The animals assigned to the Scop Ipsi group on day one, received infusions into opposite hemispheres (Scop Contra) on day two (minimum of 48 h later). Likewise, the animals in the Scop Contra group on day one, received ipsilateral infusions on day two. Figure 3 shows discrimination performance following a 5 min or 1 h delay. A two-way within-subject ANOVA revealed that the Scop Contra group was significantly impaired (infusion F _(1,20) = 44.35, P < 0.001) irrespective of the delay (infusion × delay F _(1,20) < 1.0, P < 0.05). Further analysis confirmed that the Scop Contra group failed to discriminate between the moved and unmoved objects (5 min t ₍₁₀₎ = 0.70, P > 0.1; 1 h t ₍₁₀₎ = 1.03, P > 0.1), while the Scop Ipsi group preferentially explored the moved objects (5 min t ₍₁₀₎ = 9.99, P < 0.0001; 1 h t ₍₁₀₎ = 4.34, P = 0.001).Open in a separate windowFigure 3.Unilateral scopolamine infusions into the PRH and mPFC in opposite hemispheres (Scop Contra) impaired object-in-place performance following both a 5 min and a 1 h delay. Scopolamine infusions into both the PRH and mPFC in the same hemisphere (Scop Ipsi) had no effect on performance following either delay. ** P < 0.01 and *** P < 0.001 difference between groups.Scopolamine was without effect on overall exploration levels during the sample (infusion × delay F _(1,20) < 1.0, P > 0.05; infusion F _(1,20) < 1.0, P > 0.05; delay F _(1,20) < 1.0, P > 0.05) or test phases (infusion × delay F _(1,20) < 1.0, P  >  0.05; infusion F _(1,20)  <  1.0, P > 0.05). There was a significant main effect of delay (F _(1,20) = 10.67, P < 0.01), as the Scop Ipsi and Scop Contra groups completed a greater amount of exploration in the test phase following a 1 h delay compared to a 5 min delay.These results demonstrate that acquisition, but not retrieval of object-in-place memory, is dependent upon muscarinic cholinergic neurotransmission in both the mPFC and PRH. Thus, acute bilateral administration of scopolamine directly into the mPFC or PRH before the sample phase impaired both short- and long-term memory performances. In contrast administration of scopolamine into either the mPFC or PRH prior to the test phase had no effect. Significantly, co-administration of scopolamine into the PRH and mPFC in opposite hemispheres produced a significant impairment in both short-term and long-term object-in-place memory compared to performance following co-administration of scopolamine into the PRH and mPFC in the same hemisphere. Thus, concomitant activation of cholinergic muscarinic receptors is necessary in both regions for the formation of object-in-place associative recognition memory.Our previous studies investigating the role of the mPFC and PRH in object-in-place associative memory suggest that these regions make different cognitive contributions to this mnemonic process. Thus, the PRH appears to be primarily involved in the acquisition of “object” information, while we have hypothesized that the role of the mPFC is to integrate object and place information (Barker et al. 2007). As administration of scopolamine into either region disrupted performance following a long- or short-retention delay, the present data suggest that the neural mechanisms underlying both these different cognitive processes must be dependent upon cholinergic neurotransmission.The results demonstrate that muscarinic receptor neurotransmission is clearly critical for acquisition of the object-in-place task as no impairment was produced when scopolamine was administered only prior to the test phase. While the current study is the first to investigate the importance of cholinergic neurotransmission in object-in-place associative memory, a number of previous studies have shown that intra-PRH infusions of scopolamine block discrimination of novel and familiar objects when administered prior to the sample phase, but not when administered immediately after the sample phase or prior to the test phase (Aigner and Mishkin 1986; Aigner et al. 1991; Warburton et al. 2003; Winters et al. 2006). Thus, together these results support the hypothesis that muscarinic cholinergic neurotransmission within the PRH is necessary for encoding representations of new visual stimuli for subsequent recognition (Turchi et al. 2005), but not for the retrieval of such information. The present results also show for the first time that muscarinic receptor neurotransmission within the mPFC is crucial for the encoding, but not the retrieval of object-in-place memory.It may be argued that the disruptions in performance following administration of scopolamine reflect disruptions in attentional processing. Indeed muscarinic cholinergic neurotransmission in the prefrontal cortex has been implicated in both mnemonic and attentional processes (Voytko et al. 1994; Everitt and Robbins 1997; Chudasama et al. 2004; Dalley et al. 2004). However, deficits in attentional processing are typically observed when the attentional demands of the tasks are high, for example, when very short (millisecond) stimulus exposure times are used (Chudasama et al. 2004; Dalley et al. 2004). In the present study, the exposure time to the stimuli is relatively long (minutes); further there was no evidence of a drug-associated change in explorative behavior following either an infusion into the mPFC or PRH or simultaneously into both regions. Thus, it seems unlikely that the impairments in memory observed can be attributed purely to an attentional deficit, although it is possible that during the encoding of the object-in-place task attentional processes are also recruited involving the cholinergic afferents to the mPFC or PRH.The results showing that simultaneous muscarinic cholinergic blockade in the PRH and mPFC produces a significant impairment in performance support our previous findings of a neural system for object-in-place memory and extend these findings to show that cholinergic neurotransmission is a key component within the system. Our results also support those studies in primates demonstrating a circuit involving the basal forebrain, frontal cortex, and inferior temporal cortex is necessary for object memory encoding (Easton et al. 2002; Easton and Parker 2003).Results from our laboratory have shown that the maintenance of long-term, but not short-term, object-in-place memory is critically dependent upon concurrent NMDA receptor activation in the PRH and mPFC (Barker and Warburton 2008), while short-term object-in-place performance is dependent upon kainate receptor activation in the PRH. Hence, we have argued that there may be multiple cellular mechanisms underlying encoding of information for the short or long term. The present study contrasts with these findings as it demonstrates the necessity for muscarinic receptor activation for both short- and long-term object-in-place memory. Primate studies have indicated that a synergistic interaction between the cholinergic and glutamatergic systems plays an important role in the regulation of visual recognition memory (Matsuoka and Aigner 1996). Hence, further investigations are warranted to explore such interactions in the rat; for example, an interaction between NMDA and muscarinic receptor neurotransmission may mediate long-term recognition memory, while a kainate–muscarinic receptor interaction may mediate short-term recognition memory. Further, the extent to which the contribution of the cholinergic system to encoding of object-in-place memory within the PRH-mPFC system is the same for both short- or long-term memory is unknown.Our results have demonstrated that when a subject is required to use information concerning an association between an object and a place to produce a behavioral response, muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the mPFC are involved. Further, the object-in-place task requires the subject to acquire and remember the topographical relationship between the objects, a process that is known to depend upon the parietal cortex (Goodrich-Hunsaker et al. 2005). The precise contribution of object and spatial information processing in the parietal cortex to the operation of the PRH-mPFC circuit has yet to be determined.In conclusion, the cholinergic projections to the PRH and mPFC originating in the basal forebrain (Wenk et al. 1980) are an important component of the neural mechanisms underlying short- and long-term object-in-place associative memory.     

Memory for between‐list and within‐list information in amnesic patients with temporal lobe and diencephalic lesions

Patients with medial temporal lobe damage and diencephalic damage were compared on two tests of verbal temporal order memory: between‐list discrimination and within‐list discrimination. Both patient groups were impaired relative to a group of healthy control participants. In addition, despite comparable levels of item recognition, the diencephalic group was impaired relative to the medial temporal lobe group on both within‐list and between‐list discrimination. Temporal order memory for between‐list information showed a significant correlation with a composite measure of recognition memory, and the results are discussed in terms of the patients' reliance on familiarity and distance‐based processes to make temporal order judgments.     

Muscarinic receptors activity in the perirhinal cortex and hippocampus has differential involvement in the formation of recognition memory

In this work we probed the effects of post-trial infusions of the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine on object recognition memory formation. Scopolamine was infused bilaterally immediately after the sample phase in the perirhinal cortex or dorsal hippocampus and animals were tested for short-term (90 min) or long-term (24 h) memory. Results showed that scopolamine impaired short-term memory when injected in either the perirhinal cortex or hippocampus. Nevertheless, scopolamine disrupted long-term memory when administrated in the perirhinal cortex but not when applied in the hippocampus. Long-term memory was unaffected when scopolamine was infused 160 min after the sample phase or 90 min before test phase. Our data indicate that short-term recognition memory requires muscarinic receptors signaling in both the perirhinal cortex and hippocampus, whereas long-term recognition memory depends on muscarinic receptors in the perirhinal cortex but not hippocampus. These results support a differential involvement of muscarinic activity in these two medial temporal lobe structures in the formation of recognition memory.