Trace and contextual fear conditioning require neural activity and NMDA receptor-dependent transmission in the medial prefrontal cortex

The contribution of the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) to the formation of memory is a subject of considerable recent interest. Notably, the mechanisms supporting memory acquisition in this structure are poorly understood. The mPFC has been implicated in the acquisition of trace fear conditioning, a task that requires the association of a conditional stimulus (CS) and an aversive unconditional stimulus (UCS) across a temporal gap. In both rat and human subjects, frontal regions show increased activity during the trace interval separating the CS and UCS. We investigated the contribution of prefrontal neural activity in the rat to the acquisition of trace fear conditioning using microinfusions of the γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA_A) receptor agonist muscimol. We also investigated the role of prefrontal N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor-mediated signaling in trace fear conditioning using the NMDA receptor antagonist 2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid (APV). Temporary inactivation of prefrontal activity with muscimol or blockade of NMDA receptor-dependent transmission in mPFC impaired the acquisition of trace, but not delay, conditional fear responses. Simultaneously acquired contextual fear responses were also impaired in drug-treated rats exposed to trace or delay, but not unpaired, training protocols. Our results support the idea that synaptic plasticity within the mPFC is critical for the long-term storage of memory in trace fear conditioning.The prefrontal cortex participates in a wide range of complex cognitive functions including working memory, attention, and behavioral inhibition (Fuster 2001). In recent years, the known functions of the prefrontal cortex have been extended to include a role in long-term memory encoding and retrieval (Blumenfeld and Ranganath 2006; Jung et al. 2008). The prefrontal cortex may be involved in the acquisition, expression, extinction, and systems consolidation of memory (Frankland et al. 2004; Santini et al. 2004; Takehara-Nishiuchi et al. 2005; Corcoran and Quirk 2007; Jung et al. 2008). Of these processes, the mechanisms supporting the acquisition of memory may be the least understood. Recently, the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) has been shown to be important for trace fear conditioning (Runyan et al. 2004; Gilmartin and McEchron 2005), which provides a powerful model system for studying the neurobiological basis of prefrontal contributions to memory. Trace fear conditioning is a variant of standard “delay” fear conditioning in which a neutral conditional stimulus (CS) is paired with an aversive unconditional stimulus (UCS). Trace conditioning differs from delay conditioning by the addition of a stimulus-free “trace” interval of several seconds separating the CS and UCS. Learning the CS–UCS association across this interval requires forebrain structures such as the hippocampus and mPFC. Importantly, the mPFC and hippocampus are only necessary for learning when a trace interval separates the stimuli (Solomon et al. 1986; Kronforst-Collins and Disterhoft 1998; McEchron et al. 1998; Takehara-Nishiuchi et al. 2005). This forebrain dependence has led to the hypothesis that neural activity in these structures is necessary to bridge the CS–UCS temporal gap. In support of this hypothesis, single neurons recorded from the prelimbic area of the rat mPFC exhibit sustained increases in firing during the CS and trace interval in trace fear conditioning (Baeg et al. 2001; Gilmartin and McEchron 2005). Similar sustained responses are not observed following the CS in delay conditioned animals or unpaired control animals. This pattern of activity is consistent with a working memory or “bridging” role for mPFC in trace fear conditioning, but it is not clear whether this activity is actually necessary for learning. We address this issue here using the γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA_A) receptor agonist muscimol to temporarily inactivate cellular activity in the prelimbic mPFC during the acquisition of trace fear conditioning.The contribution of mPFC to the long-term storage (i.e., 24 h or more) of trace fear conditioning, as opposed to a strictly working memory role (i.e., seconds to minutes), is a matter of some debate. Recent reports suggest that intact prefrontal activity at the time of testing is required for the recall of trace fear conditioning 2 d after training (Blum et al. 2006a), while mPFC lesions performed 1 d after training fail to disrupt the memory (Quinn et al. 2008). The findings from the former study may reflect a role for prelimbic mPFC in the expression of conditional fear rather than memory storage per se (Corcoran and Quirk 2007). However, blockade of the intracellular mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascade during training impairs the subsequent retention of trace fear conditioning 48 h later (Runyan et al. 2004). Activation of the MAPK signaling cascade can result in the synthesis of proteins necessary for synaptic strengthening, providing a potential mechanism by which mPFC may participate in memory storage. To better understand the nature of the prefrontal contribution to long-term memory, more information is needed about fundamental plasticity mechanisms in this structure. Dependence on N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors (NMDAR) is a key feature of many forms of long-term memory, both in vitro and in vivo. The induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) in the hippocampus, a cellular model of long-term plasticity and information storage, requires NMDAR activation (Reymann et al. 1989). Genetic knockdown or pharmacological blockade of NMDAR-mediated neurotransmission in the hippocampus impairs several forms of hippocampus-dependent memory, including trace fear conditioning (Tonegawa et al. 1996; Huerta et al. 2000; Quinn et al. 2005), but it is unknown if activation of these receptors is necessary in the mPFC for the acquisition of trace fear conditioning. Data from in vivo electrophysiology studies have shown that stimulation of ventral hippocampal inputs to prelimbic neurons in mPFC produces LTP, and the induction of prefrontal LTP depends upon functional NMDARs (Laroche et al. 1990; Jay et al. 1995). If the role of mPFC in trace fear conditioning goes beyond simply maintaining CS information in working memory, then activation of NMDAR may be critical to memory formation. We test this hypothesis by reversibly blocking NMDAR neurotransmission with 2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid (APV) during training to examine the role of prefrontal NMDAR to the acquisition of trace fear conditioning.Another important question is whether mPFC contributes to the formation of contextual fear memories. Fear to the training context is acquired simultaneously with fear to the auditory CS in both trace and delay fear conditioning. Conflicting reports in the literature suggest the role of mPFC in contextual fear conditioning is unclear. Damage to ventral areas of mPFC prior to delay fear conditioning has failed to impair context fear acquisition (Morgan et al. 1993). Prefrontal lesions incorporating dorsal mPFC have in some cases been reported to augment fear responses to the context (Morgan and LeDoux 1995), while blockade of NMDAR transmission has impaired contextual fear conditioning (Zhao et al. 2005). Post-training lesions of mPFC impair context fear retention (Quinn et al. 2008) in trace and delay conditioning. Contextual fear responses were assessed in this study to determine the contribution of neuronal activity and NMDAR-mediated signaling in mPFC to the acquisition of contextual fear conditioning.     

A molecular dissociation between cued and contextual appetitive learning

In appetitive Pavlovian learning, animals learn to associate discrete cues or environmental contexts with rewarding outcomes, and these cues and/or contexts can potentiate an ongoing instrumental response for reward. Although anatomical substrates underlying cued and contextual learning have been proposed, it remains unknown whether specific molecular signaling pathways within the striatum underlie one form of learning or the other. Here, we show that while the striatum-enriched isoform of adenylyl cyclase (AC5) is required for cued appetitive Pavlovian learning, it is not required for contextual appetitive learning. Mice lacking AC5 (AC5KO) could not learn an appetitive Pavlovian learning task in which a discrete signal light predicted reward delivery, yet they could form associations between context and either natural or drug reward, which could in turn elicit Pavlovian approach behavior. However, unlike wild-type (WT) mice, AC5KO mice could not use these Pavlovian conditioned stimuli to potentiate ongoing instrumental behavior in a Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer paradigm. These data suggest that AC5 is specifically required for learning associations between discrete cues and outcomes in which the temporal relationship between conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US) is essential, while alternative signaling mechanisms may underlie the formation of associations between context and reward. In addition, loss of AC5 compromises the ability of both contextual and discrete cues to modulate instrumental behavior.In Pavlovian learning, animals form associations between discrete or contextual stimuli in their environment to shape their behavior and make appropriate responses. In discrete cue appetitive Pavlovian conditioning, a single cue with a defined onset and offset that typically activates one sensory modality is provided, immediately followed by reward delivery (Hall 2002; Domjan 2006; Ito et al. 2006). Alternatively, behavior can be driven by context, an assortment of stimuli activating a number of sensory modalities that contribute to the representation of environmental space (Balsam 1985; Rudy and Sutherland 1995; Smith and Mizumori 2006). Collectively, these stimuli make up a context that is paired with reward delivery in contextual appetitive learning. One important distinction between these two forms of learning is that in cued conditioning, there is a discrete temporal relationship between conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US). Thus, an animal can effectively anticipate timing of reward delivery from onset and offset of CS. In vivo studies of dopamine (DA) neuron activity have suggested this discrete temporal relationship can be encoded by DA neurons (Schultz et al. 1997; Schultz 1998a). In contrast, in many contextual Pavlovian conditioning tasks, US delivery is not predicted, it is delivered as the animal explores the environment; thus, the temporal relationship between contextual stimuli and reinforcement is not an essential component of the learned associations (Fanselow 2000). These two types of environmental stimuli may be encoded differently and mediated by different neural substrates.Lesion studies have elucidated the anatomical dissociations between cued and contextual appetitive learning. Using a modified Y-maze procedure, it has been suggested that contextual appetitive learning is hippocampus- and nucleus-accumbens (NAc) dependent, while cued learning is dependent on the basolateral nucleus of the amygdala (BLA) and the NAc (Ito et al. 2005, 2006). In addition, as the NAc processes glutamatergic inputs from the amygdala and the hippocampus (Groenewegen et al. 1999; Goto and Grace 2008), recent studies have indicated that disconnecting the hippocampus from the NAc shell can disrupt contextual appetitive conditioning (Ito et al. 2008). In addition to glutamatergic inputs, the NAc, as part of the ventral striatum, receives dense dopaminergic input from midbrain nuclei (Groenewegen et al. 1999). Temporal shifts in phasic DA release in striatal regions has been correlated with appetitive Pavlovian learning (Day et al. 2007), and models of striatal function suggest that DA-dependent modification of glutamatergic transmission in the striatum may underlie reinforcement learning (Reynolds et al. 2001; Reynolds and Wickens 2002).The cAMP pathway has been implicated in plasticity and learning in a number of neuronal structures (Abel et al. 1997; Ferguson and Storm 2004; Pittenger et al. 2006). Adenylyl cyclase (AC), the enzyme that makes cAMP, has nine membrane-bound isoforms, each with different expression patterns and regulatory properties (Hanoune and Defer 2001). AC5 is highly enriched in the striatum, with very low levels of expression in other regions of the brain (Mons et al. 1998; Iwamoto et al. 2003; Kheirbek et al. 2008, 2009), and genetic deletion of AC5 (AC5KO) severely compromises DA''s ability to modulate cAMP levels in the striatum (Iwamoto et al. 2003). Previous studies have shown that AC5KO mice were severely impaired in acquisition of a cued appetitive Pavlovian learning task, while formation of action–outcome contingencies in instrumental learning was intact (Kheirbek et al. 2008). Yet, it remains unknown whether the cAMP pathway in the striatum underlies all forms of appetitive Pavlovian learning, or how it contributes to the ability of Pavlovian cues to modulate instrumental behavior.In this study, we asked if genetic deletion of AC5 selectively impairs cued or contextual appetitive learning. In addition, we tested whether loss of AC5 affects the ability of conditioned cues or contexts to modulate instrumental behavior. Our data indicate that although loss of AC5 abolishes cued appetitive learning, contextual learning is spared. Although contextual stimuli could elicit approach behavior in AC5KO mice, they could not potentiate an ongoing instrumental response, highlighting the importance of this isoform of AC in Pavlovian–instrumental interactions.     

The role of amygdala nuclei in the expression of auditory signaled two-way active avoidance in rats

Using a two-way signaled active avoidance (2-AA) learning procedure, where rats were trained in a shuttle box to avoid a footshock signaled by an auditory stimulus, we tested the contributions of the lateral (LA), basal (B), and central (CE) nuclei of the amygdala to the expression of instrumental active avoidance conditioned responses (CRs). Discrete or combined lesions of the LA and B, performed after the rats had reached an asymptotic level of avoidance performance, produced deficits in the CR, whereas CE lesions had minimal effect. Fiber-sparing excitotoxic lesions of the LA/B produced by infusions of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) also impaired avoidance performance, confirming that neurons in the LA/B are involved in mediating avoidance CRs. In a final series of experiments, bilateral electrolytic lesions of the CE were performed on a subgroup of animals that failed to acquire the avoidance CR after 3 d of training. CE lesions led to an immediate rescue of avoidance learning, suggesting that activity in CE was inhibiting the instrumental CR. Taken together, these results indicate that the LA and B are essential for the performance of a 2-AA response. The CE is not required, and may in fact constrain the instrumental avoidance response by mediating the generation of competing Pavlovian responses, such as freezing.Early studies of the neural basis of fear often employed avoidance conditioning procedures where fear was assessed by measuring instrumental responses that reduced exposure to aversive stimuli (e.g., Weiskrantz 1956; Goddard 1964; Sarter and Markowitsch 1985; Gabriel and Sparenborg 1986). Despite much research, studies of avoidance failed to yield a coherent view of the brain mechanisms of fear. In some studies, a region such as the amygdala would be found to be essential and in other studies would not. In contrast, rapid progress in understanding the neural basis of fear and fear learning was made when researchers turned to the use of Pavlovian fear conditioning (Kapp et al. 1984, 1992; LeDoux et al. 1984; Davis 1992; LeDoux 1992; Cain and Ledoux 2008a). It is now well established from such studies that specific nuclei and subnuclei of the amygdala are essential for the acquisition and storage of Pavlovian associative memories about threatening situations (LeDoux 2000; Fanselow and Gale 2003; Maren 2003; Maren and Quirk 2004; Schafe et al. 2005; Davis 2006).Several factors probably contributed to the fact that Pavlovian conditioning succeeded where avoidance conditioning struggled. First, avoidance conditioning has long been viewed as a two-stage learning process (Mowrer and Lamoreaux 1946; Miller 1948b; McAllister and McAllister 1971; Levis 1989; Cain and LeDoux 2008b). In avoidance learning, the subject initially undergoes Pavlovian conditioning and forms an association between the shock and cues in the apparatus. The shock is an unconditioned stimulus (US) and the cues are conditioned stimuli (CS). Subsequently, the subject learns the instrumental response to avoid the shock. Further, the “fear” aroused by the presence of the CS motivates learning of the instrumental response. Fear reduction associated with successful avoidance has even been proposed to be the event that reinforces avoidance learning (e.g., Miller 1948b; McAllister and McAllister 1971; Cain and LeDoux 2007). Given that Pavlovian conditioning is the initial stage of avoidance conditioning, as well as the source of the “fear” in this paradigm, it would be more constructive to study the brain mechanisms of fear through studies of Pavlovian conditioning rather than through paradigms where Pavlovian and instrumental conditioning are intermixed. Second, avoidance conditioning was studied in a variety of ways, but it was not as well appreciated at the time as it is today; that subtle differences in the way tasks are structured can have dramatic effects on the brain mechanisms required to perform the task. There was also less of an appreciation for the detailed organization of circuits in areas such as the amygdala. Thus, some avoidance studies examined the effects of removal of the entire amygdala or multiple subdivisions (for review, see Sarter and Markowitsch 1985). Finally, fear conditioning studies typically involved a discrete CS, usually a tone, which could be tracked from sensory processing areas of the auditory system to specific amygdala nuclei that process the CS, form the CS–US association, and control the expression of defense responses mediated by specific motor outputs. In contrast, studies of avoidance conditioning often involved diffuse cues, and the instrumental responses used to indirectly measure fear were complex and not easily mapped onto neural circuits.Despite the lack of progress in understanding the neural basis of avoidance responses, this behavioral paradigm has clinical relevance. For example, avoidance behaviors provide an effective means of dealing with fear in anticipation of a harmful event. When information is successfully used to avoid harm, not only is the harmful event prevented, but also the fear arousal, anxiety, and stress associated with such events; (Solomon and Wynne 1954; Kamin et al. 1963). Because avoidance is such a successful strategy to cope with danger, it is used extensively by patients with fear-related disorders to reduce their exposure to fear- or anxiety-provoking situations. Pathological avoidance is, in fact, a hallmark of anxiety disorders: In avoiding fear and anxiety, patients often fail to perform normal daily activities (Mineka and Zinbarg 2006).We are revisiting the circuits of avoidance conditioning from the perspective of having detailed knowledge of the circuit of the first stage of avoidance, Pavlovian conditioning. To most effectively take advantage of Pavlovian conditioning findings, we have designed an avoidance task that uses a tone and a shock. Rats were trained to shuttle back and forth in a runway in order to avoid shock under the direction of a tone. That is, the subjects could avoid a shock if they performed a shuttle response when the tone was on, but received a shock if they stayed in the same place (two-way signaled active avoidance, 2-AA). While the amygdala has been implicated in 2-AA (for review, see Sarter and Markowitsch 1985), the exact amygdala nuclei and their interrelation in a circuit are poorly understood.We focused on the role of amygdala areas that have been studied extensively in fear conditioning: the lateral (LA), basal (B), and central (CE) nuclei. The LA is widely thought to be the locus of plasticity and storage of the CS–US association, and is an essential part of the fear conditioning circuitry. The basal amygdala, which receives inputs from the LA (Pitkänen 2000), is not normally required for the acquisition and expression of fear conditioning (Amorapanth et al. 2000; Nader et al. 2001), although it may contribute under some circumstances (Goosens and Maren 2001; Anglada-Figueroa and Quirk 2005). The B is also required for the use of the CS in the motivation and reinforcement of responses in other aversive instrumental tasks (Killcross et al. 1997; Amorapanth et al. 2000). The CE, through connections to hypothalamic and brainstem areas (Pitkänen 2000), is required for the expression of Pavlovian fear responses (Kapp et al. 1979, 1992; LeDoux et al. 1988; Hitchcock and Davis 1991) but not for the motivation or reinforcement of aversive instrumental responses (Amorapanth et al. 2000; LeDoux et al. 2009). We thus hypothesized that damage to the LA or B, but not to the CE, would interfere with the performance of signaled active avoidance.     

A cognitive map for object memory in the hippocampus

The hippocampus has been proposed to support a cognitive map, a mental representation of the spatial layout of an environment as well as the nonspatial items encountered in that environment. In the present study, we recorded simultaneously from 43 to 61 hippocampal pyramidal cells as rats performed an object recognition memory task in which novel and repeated objects were encountered in different locations on a circular track. Multivariate analyses of the neural data indicated that information about object identity was represented secondarily to the primary information dimension of object location. In addition, the neural data related to performance on the recognition memory task. The results suggested that objects were represented as points of interest on the hippocampal cognitive map and that this map was useful in remembering encounters with particular objects in specific locations.The hippocampus plays an important role in spatial memory for both humans and rodents (O''Keefe 1999; Burgess et al. 2002). Findings from many studies in rodents indicate that the hippocampus supports memory for locations referenced to external landmarks, a capacity that O''Keefe and Nadel (1978) described over 30 yr ago as a “cognitive map” (using a term they borrowed from Tolman 1948). In the time since that pioneering thesis, it has become clear that the rodent hippocampus is also important for nonspatial memory (Eichenbaum et al. 1999). Damage to the rat hippocampus (defined here as CA fields, dentate gyrus, and subiculum) leads to impairments on nonspatial tasks, including object recognition memory (Clark et al. 2000; Fortin et al. 2004), transitive odor associations (Bunsey and Eichenbaum 1996), memory for temporal order (Fortin et al. 2002; Kesner et al. 2002), and social transmission of food preference (Alvarez et al. 2001; Clark et al. 2002).The circuitry by which information arrives at and exits from the hippocampus is consistent with the idea that the hippocampus is important for both spatial and nonspatial memory. In both rats and macaques, detailed anatomical studies have indicated that spatial information arrives at the hippocampus via the postrhinal cortex (parahippocampal cortex in primates) and the medial entorhinal cortex, whereas nonspatial information takes a path largely through the perirhinal cortex and lateral entorhinal cortex (Witter and Amaral 1991; Suzuki and Amaral 1994; Witter et al. 2000). Thus, the hippocampus is ideally situated to combine spatial and nonspatial information in the service of remembering item–location associations (Manns and Eichenbaum 2006).Single-unit recording studies in the rat hippocampus have largely focused on the spatial correlates of hippocampal pyramidal neuron firing rates. Fewer studies have investigated nonspatial correlates of hippocampal activity during memory tasks for nonspatial items. However, in one such study, Wood et al. (1999) found that some individual hippocampal pyramidal neurons responded to particular odors and that others responded to particular odors in specific locations during an odor recognition memory task. Thus, activity of individual cells appeared to contain information about nonspatial items as well as spatial locations.An important question is how the activity of individual hippocampal neurons combine to represent item–location associations as a neural ensemble. In particular, how is an encounter with an object in a particular location represented in the pattern of spiking among many hippocampal pyramidal neurons? How might this representation relate to memory for the object or for the location? In the present study, we recorded simultaneously from 43 to 61 hippocampal pyramidal cells as rats performed an object recognition memory task in which novel and repeated objects were encountered in different locations on a circular track. Multivariate analyses of the neural data indicated that information about object identity was represented secondarily to the primary information dimension of object location. In addition, the analyses indicated that the neural data related to performance on the recognition memory task. The results suggest that objects were represented as points of interest on the hippocampal cognitive map and that this map was useful in remembering encounters with particular objects in specific locations.     

Time-dependent transformations of memory representations differ along the long axis of the hippocampus

Research has shown that sleep is beneficial for the long-term retention of memories. According to theories of memory consolidation, memories are gradually reorganized, becoming supported by widespread, distributed cortical networks, particularly during postencoding periods of sleep. However, the effects of sleep on the organization of memories in the hippocampus itself remains less clear. In a 3-d study, participants encoded separate lists of word–image pairs differing in their opportunity for sleep-dependent consolidation. Pairs were initially studied either before or after an overnight sleep period, and were then restudied in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan session. We used multivariate pattern similarity analyses to examine fine-grained effects of consolidation on memory representations in the hippocampus. We provide evidence for a dissociation along the long axis of the hippocampus that emerges with consolidation, such that representational patterns for object–word memories initially formed prior to sleep become differentiated in anterior hippocampus and more similar, or overlapping, in posterior hippocampus. Differentiation in anterior hippocampal representations correlated with subsequent behavioral performance. Furthermore, representational overlap in posterior hippocampus correlated with the duration of intervening slow wave sleep. Together, these results demonstrate that sleep-dependent consolidation promotes the reorganization of memory traces along the long axis of the hippocampus.

The hippocampus has long been considered critical for encoding new memories; however, the effects of consolidation on hippocampal memory traces has remained an area of active research. Memories are thought to be stabilized for the long term as they become distributed across neocortical networks (Buzsáki 1989; Alvarez and Squire 1994; McClelland et al. 1995), a process supported by mechanisms during sleep (Diekelmann and Born 2010; Rasch and Born 2013). Whereas much research has been devoted to understanding the hippocampal contributions to the long-term retention of memories, open questions remain in considering how sleep-dependent consolidation affects the organization of hippocampal traces.The hippocampus has previously been shown to be critical for binding disparate elements of an experience together (Cohen and Eichenbaum 1993; Davachi 2006). Theories suggest that the hippocampus quickly encodes new experiences, while the cortex, with a slower learning rate, gradually comes to represent the central features from this hippocampal trace, resulting in abstracted memories that can be integrated into long-term cortical stores (McClelland et al. 1995). Prior research has demonstrated evidence for a coordinated hippocampal–cortical dialogue during sleep (Andrade et al. 2011; Bergmann et al. 2012; Ngo et al. 2020) as well as enhanced hippocampal–cortical functional connectivity after learning, facilitating the retention of memories (Tambini et al. 2010; Tompary et al. 2015; Murty et al. 2017; Cowan et al. 2021). Reports suggest consolidation results in more integrated cortical memory traces in the cortex (Richards et al. 2014; Tompary and Davachi 2017; Cowan et al. 2020); however, it remains an open question whether the active consolidation processes that support memory reorganization across hippocampal–cortical networks also transform hippocampal memory traces.Research on the fate of the hippocampal trace with consolidation has often focused on questions about the permanence of memories in the hippocampus. Theories of systems consolidation have classically debated whether the hippocampal trace is time-limited (Alvarez and Squire 1994), or, rather, whether the hippocampus continues to represent memories in perpetuity (Nadel and Moscovitch 1997; Winocur and Moscovitch 2011; Moscovitch et al. 2016; Sekeres et al. 2018a). Another theory posits that while the original hippocampal trace is transient, during retrieval the hippocampus reconstructs details of an experience from cortical traces (Barry and Maguire 2019). Much research in this vein has focused on investigating changes in hippocampal blood-oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) univariate activation with time (Bosshardt et al. 2005a,b; Takashima et al. 2006, 2009; Gais et al. 2007; Sterpenich et al. 2007, 2009; Yamashita et al. 2009; Milton et al. 2011; Watanabe et al. 2012; Ritchey et al. 2015; Baran et al. 2016; Dandolo and Schwabe 2018) and the effects of hippocampal lesions in animals and humans (Winocur et al. 2001; Frankland and Bontempi 2005; Winocur and Moscovitch 2011; Moscovitch et al. 2016) with mixed results. Interestingly, pinpointing these effects along the long axis of the hippocampus has also proven unclear. Some reports have found that only the anterior hippocampus exhibits time-dependent changes in retrieval-related univariate activation, with evidence of decreases with delay (Takashima et al. 2006; Milton et al. 2011; Dandolo and Schwabe 2018), but also evidence of greater activation for more remote, compared with recent, memories (Bosshardt et al. 2005a,b). At the same time, other studies have found decreases in univariate activation only in the posterior hippocampus (Bosshardt et al. 2005b; Takashima et al. 2009; Yamashita et al. 2009; Milton et al. 2011; Watanabe et al. 2012; Ritchey et al. 2015; Sekeres et al. 2018b).Because of these conflicting findings, instead of asking just about dependence or overall changes in activation in the hippocampus, theories and empirical research have instead increasingly considered the organization of memory representations in the hippocampus (Robin and Moscovitch 2017; Sekeres et al. 2018a). Broadly, using representational similarity analyses, several studies have shown that hippocampal memory representations tend to become differentiated over learning, particularly for memories with overlapping content (LaRocque et al. 2013; Schlichting et al. 2015; Chanales et al. 2017; Brunec et al. 2020). Furthermore, it has been suggested that information is represented at different scales or “granularity” along the long axis of the hippocampus, in line with place field size differences (Kjelstrup et al. 2008; Komorowski et al. 2013), with anterior hippocampus representing more similar, coarse-grained, or gist-like information, while the posterior hippocampus represents fine-grained, detail-oriented representations (Evensmoen et al. 2013; Poppenk et al. 2013; Robin and Moscovitch 2017; Brunec et al. 2018, 2020). However, limited work has investigated whether this representational organization is altered with consolidation. Reports have shown that memory representations sharing overlapping content become more similar over a delay (Tompary and Davachi 2017; Audrain and McAndrews 2020), yet other work has found that hippocampal representations were not modulated by time (Ritchey et al. 2015; Ezzyat et al. 2018). Intriguingly, reports indicating greater differentiation in memories in anterior compared with posterior hippocampus with consolidation (Tompary and Davachi 2017; Dandolo and Schwabe 2018; Ezzyat et al. 2018) raise the possibility that the representational granularity along the anteroposterior axis may be transformed with consolidation. Thus, more work is needed to understand how consolidation influences the representational structure of memories in the hippocampus. In particular, despite much research connecting sleep to consolidation (Diekelmann and Born 2010; Rasch and Born 2013), it remains unknown whether sleep-dependent processes facilitate such delay-dependent transformations to the hippocampus.Active processes in the sleeping brain seem to be optimized for systems consolidation. Currently, the best mechanistic evidence for sleep-dependent consolidation comes from studies on hippocampal replay showing the repeated reactivation of encoding-related patterns of hippocampal activity (Buzsáki 1989; Wilson and McNaughton 1994; Girardeau and Zugaro 2011), which seems to be coordinated with replay in areas of the cortex (Ji and Wilson 2007; Peyrache et al. 2009; Wierzynski et al. 2009). It is thought that the coupling between oscillations during non-REM sleep stages (particularly slow wave sleep [SWS])—including sharp wave ripples that support replay, thalamocortical spindles, and slow oscillations—facilitates the hippocampal–cortical dialogue and information transfer to the cortex (Buzsáki 1996; Sirota et al. 2003; Steriade 2006; Clemens et al. 2011; Mölle and Born 2011; Staresina et al. 2015). Indeed, our previously published work from the present study provided supporting evidence that the density of thalamocortical sleep spindles (11–16 Hz) during overnight sleep is related to enhanced hippocampal–cortical functional connectivity measures, and increased similarity, or greater representational overlap, among memories in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) (Cowan et al. 2020). Yet, while some prior work has shown that features of sleep, including spindle density and the duration of non-REM SWS, are related to decreased retrieval-related hippocampal activation for memoranda learned prior to sleep (Takashima et al. 2006; Baran et al. 2016; Hennies et al. 2016), it remains unclear how the reactivation of hippocampal traces during replay may impact the way memories are organized along the long axis of the hippocampus.To examine the effects of sleep-dependent consolidation on the neural representation of memories in the hippocampus, we designed a within-participant 3-d study using overnight polysomnography (PSG), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and behavioral measures of memory (Fig. 1). In this study, aspects of which have been previously published (Cowan et al. 2020), participants first studied a list of word–image pairs before sleeping overnight (Sleep List), during which PSG was recorded. Upon waking in the morning, participants studied a new list of pairs (Morning List). The word–image pairs from these two lists were then restudied while undergoing an fMRI scan, intermixed with a third, novel list of pairs (Single Study List). Associative memory was tested immediately after the scan and again 24 h later. We compared measures of multivariate pattern similarity and univariate BOLD signal for the lists learned prior to, or after, sleep to probe how modulating the opportunity for sleep-dependent consolidation impacts the way memories are organized across the long axis of the hippocampus. Furthermore, our design allowed us to examine how features of overnight sleep are related to the representational organization of memories learned prior to the sleep period, as well as the behavioral benefit of changes to the organization of these memories. Thus, our study provides a novel examination of the effects of sleep-dependent consolidation on the representation of memories along the long axis of the hippocampus.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Study design. For all encoding and restudy sessions, participants were asked to form an association between a word and an image. Participants first encoded the Sleep List (blue) before sleeping overnight while polysomnography was recorded. The next morning (day 2), participants encoded a second set of novel word–image pairs (Morning List). After a short delay (∼2 h), participants restudied these two sets of pairs, intermixed with novel pairs (Single Study List) in the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner. Source memory was tested immediately after the scan and after a 24-h delay (day 3).     

Object recognition memory and the rodent hippocampus

In rodents, the novel object recognition task (NOR) has become a benchmark task for assessing recognition memory. Yet, despite its widespread use, a consensus has not developed about which brain structures are important for task performance. We assessed both the anterograde and retrograde effects of hippocampal lesions on performance in the NOR task. Rats received 12 5-min exposures to two identical objects and then received either bilateral lesions of the hippocampus or sham surgery 1 d, 4 wk, or 8 wk after the final exposure. On a retention test 2 wk after surgery, the 1-d and 4-wk hippocampal lesion groups exhibited impaired object recognition memory. In contrast, the 8-wk hippocampal lesion group performed similarly to controls, and both groups exhibited a preference for the novel object. These same rats were then given four postoperative tests using unique object pairs and a 3-h delay between the exposure phase and the test phase. Hippocampal lesions produced moderate and reliable memory impairment. The results suggest that the hippocampus is important for object recognition memory.Recognition memory refers to the ability to judge a previously encountered item as familiar and depends on the integrity of the medial temporal lobe (Squire et al. 2007). Tasks that assess recognition memory (and object recognition memory in particular) have become increasingly useful tools for basic and preclinical research investigating the neural basis of memory (Winters et al. 2008). Perhaps the best known of these tasks is the novel object recognition task (NOR) (also known as the visual paired-comparison task in studies with humans and monkeys).Studies of the NOR task in humans with hippocampal damage (McKee and Squire 1993; Pascalis et al. 2004) and in monkeys with selective damage to the hippocampus (Pascalis and Bachevalier 1999; Zola et al. 2000; Nemanic et al. 2004) have resulted in clear and consistent findings. Damage limited to the hippocampus is sufficient to produce impaired recognition memory (Squire et al. 2007, Box 1). In rats and mice, the NOR task has become particularly popular and is currently a benchmark task for assessing recognition memory. Yet despite its widespread use in rodents, the findings are rather mixed. For example, in the rat, although there is agreement that the perirhinal cortex is critically important for normal NOR performance, there is less agreement about the hippocampus (for review, see Winters et al. 2008). Although some of the discrepancies between studies may be attributed to differences in lesion size and in the length of the retention delay (Broadbent et al. 2004), these factors cannot account for all the findings (Squire et al. 2007).Whereas most studies have investigated the effects of hippocampal lesions on postoperative NOR performance, there is also interest in the effects of hippocampal lesions on memory for previously encountered objects. For a number of tasks, hippocampal lesions produce temporally graded retrograde amnesia, such that memory acquired recently is impaired and memory acquired more remotely is spared (for review, see Squire et al. 2004; Frankland and Bontempi 2005). In the case of the single study of retrograde memory that has involved the NOR task, recognition memory was impaired when a 5-wk interval intervened between training and hippocampal surgery (Gaskin et al. 2003). It remains possible that memory might be spared if a longer delay was imposed between training and surgery.The aim of the present study was to assess both the anterograde and retrograde effects of hippocampal lesions on recognition memory using the NOR task. To thoroughly assess the effects of hippocampal lesions we used (1) large groups of animals, (2) multiple tests of NOR memory, (3) a scoring method that allowed object preference to be determined on a second-by-second basis during the recognition tests, and (4) a novel training protocol that permitted the evaluation of recognition memory even after a retention interval as long as 10 wk.     

Beta-adrenergic receptor activation during distinct patterns of stimulation critically modulates the PKA-dependence of LTP in the mouse hippocampus

Activation of β-adrenergic receptors (β-ARs) enhances hippocampal memory consolidation and long-term potentiation (LTP), a likely mechanism for memory storage. One signaling pathway linked to β-AR activation is the cAMP-PKA pathway. PKA is critical for the consolidation of hippocampal long-term memory and for the expression of some forms of long-lasting hippocampal LTP. How does β-AR activation affect the PKA-dependence, and persistence, of LTP elicited by distinct stimulation frequencies? Here, we use in vitro electrophysiology to show that patterns of stimulation determine the temporal phase of LTP affected by β-AR activation. In addition, only specific patterns of stimulation recruit PKA-dependent LTP following β-AR activation. Impairments of PKA-dependent LTP maintenance generated by pharmacologic or genetic deficiency of PKA activity are also abolished by concurrent activation of β-ARs. Taken together, our data show that, depending on patterns of synaptic stimulation, activation of β-ARs can gate the PKA-dependence and persistence of synaptic plasticity. We suggest that this may allow neuromodulatory receptors to fine-tune neural information processing to meet the demands imposed by numerous synaptic activity profiles. This is a form of “metaplasticity” that could control the efficacy of consolidation of hippocampal long-term memories.The hippocampus importantly contributes to memory function in the mammalian brain (Zola-Morgan et al. 1986; Eichenbaum et al. 1990; Otto and Eichenbaum 1992; Phillips and LeDoux 1992; Remondes and Schuman 2004). It has reciprocal connections with numerous cortical areas, including those responsible for high-level integration of spatial and contextual data from the external environment (Lavenex and Amaral 2000). As such, the hippocampus is well positioned to receive and survey a broad range of information and select behaviorally salient data for long-term storage. Activity-dependent enhancement of hippocampal synaptic strength can store information carried in patterns of afferent neural activity (Bliss and Collingridge 1993; Moser et al. 1998; Nathe and Frank 2003; Whitlock et al. 2006). Substantial evidence suggests that long-term potentiation (LTP) of synaptic strength plays important roles in the formation of long-term memory (LTM) (Doyere and Laroche 1992; Bourtchuladze et al. 1994; Abel and Lattal 2001; Genoux et al. 2002). As such, mechanistic studies of LTP have shed valuable light on how the mammalian brain stores new information.The hippocampus receives dense noradrenergic projections from the locus coeruleus, a brain structure that can influence many vital brain functions, including attention, sleep, arousal, mood regulation, learning, and memory (Berridge and Waterhouse 2003). Both α- and β-adrenergic receptor subtypes are present on hippocampal neurons (Morrison and Foote 1986; Berridge and Waterhouse 2003), and noradrenaline (NA) acts on hippocampal β-adrenergic receptors (β-ARs) to facilitate the retention and recall of memory (Izquierdo et al. 1998; Ji et al. 2003; Murchison et al. 2004). In humans, stimulation of the noradrenergic neuromodulatory system enhances memory for emotional stimuli, and inhibition of β-ARs prevents this memory enhancement (Cahill et al. 1994; van Stegeren et al. 1998; O’Carroll et al. 1999).Consistent with the notion that selective enhancement of LTM may occur following β-AR activation, stimulation of β-ARs can also facilitate the persistence of LTP. In areas CA3 and CA1, β-AR activation facilitates the induction of long-lasting LTP when paired with certain patterns of electrical stimulation (Huang and Kandel 1996; Gelinas and Nguyen 2005). However, the mechanisms by which different patterns of stimulation control synaptic responsiveness to β-AR activation are unclear.β-ARs couple to guanine-nucleotide-binding regulatory Gs proteins to stimulate adenylyl cyclase activity and increase intracellular cAMP (Seeds and Gilman 1971; Maguire et al. 1977). A main target of cAMP signaling is activation of cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA), a kinase that is required for some forms of long-lasting LTP and for consolidation of hippocampal LTM (Frey et al. 1993; Abel et al. 1997; Nguyen and Woo 2003). Interestingly, the PKA-dependence of hippocampal LTP displays plasticity: Specific temporal patterns of synaptic stimulation, such as repeated and temporally spaced 100-Hz stimulation, elicit LTP that requires PKA for its expression (Woo et al. 2003). Also, spatial “enrichment” can increase the PKA-dependence of LTP in mice, and this is correlated with improved hippocampal memory function (Duffy et al. 2001). However, it is unclear whether activation of β-ARs can critically gate the PKA-dependence of LTP. In this study, we examine the effects of β-AR activation on LTP generated by various patterns of afferent stimulation in area CA1 of the hippocampus, and we determine the role of PKA in these β-AR-modulated forms of LTP.     

The NMDA antagonist MK-801 disrupts reconsolidation of a cocaine-associated memory for conditioned place preference but not for self-administration in rats

Recent research suggests that drug-related memories are reactivated after exposure to environmental cues and may undergo reconsolidation, a process that can strengthen memories. Conversely, reconsolidation may be disrupted by certain pharmacological agents such that the drug-associated memory is weakened. Several studies have demonstrated disruption of memory reconsolidation using a drug-induced conditioned place preference (CPP) task, but no studies have explored whether cocaine-associated memories can be similarly disrupted in cocaine self-administering animals after a cocaine priming injection, which powerfully reinstates drug-seeking behavior. Here we used cocaine-induced CPP and cocaine self-administration to investigate whether the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist (+)-5methyl-10,11-dihydro-5H-dibenzo[a,d]cyclohepten-5,10-imine maleate (MK-801) given just prior to reactivation sessions would suppress subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement (disruption of reconsolidation). Systemic injection of MK-801 (0.05 or 0.20 mg/kg administered intraperitoneally) in rats just prior to reactivation of the cocaine-associated memory in the CPP context attenuated subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement, while no disruption occurred in rats that did not receive reactivation in the CPP context. However, in rats trained to self-administer cocaine, systemic administration of MK-801 just prior to either of two different types of reactivation sessions had no effect on subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement of lever-pressing behavior. Thus, systemic administration of MK-801 disrupted the reconsolidation of a cocaine-associated memory for CPP but not for self-administration. These findings suggest that cocaine-CPP and self-administration do not use similar neurochemical processes to disrupt reconsolidation or that cocaine-associated memories in self-administering rats do not undergo reconsolidation, as assessed by lever-pressing behavior under cocaine reinstatement conditions.The ability to disrupt previously consolidated memories in a reactivation-dependent manner is thought to be due to the disruption of a memory reconsolidation process. This disruption of reconsolidation has been observed in a wide variety of tasks and species (Nader et al. 2000b; Sara 2000; Alberini 2005; Riccio et al. 2006). Early reconsolidation experiments primarily focused on aversive learning paradigms, with an emphasis on disruption of reconsolidation as a potential treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (Misanin et al. 1968; Nader et al. 2000a; Debiec and Ledoux 2004; Brunet et al. 2008). Only more recently have investigators demonstrated that appetitive memories also undergo reconsolidation; most, but not all (Yim et al. 2006), studies found a disruption of expression for the drug-associated memory, suggesting the potential to target the reconsolidation process as a treatment for drug addiction (Lee et al. 2005; Miller and Marshall 2005; Milekic et al. 2006; Valjent et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2007; Kelley et al. 2007; Sadler et al. 2007; Fricks-Gleason and Marshall 2008; Milton et al. 2008a, b).Miller and Marshall (2005) showed that reconsolidation of cocaine conditioned place preference (CPP) in the rat could be disrupted by either pre- or post-treatment of a phosphorylation inhibitor of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (1/2) (ERK) in a reactivation-dependent manner. Other studies have shown that protein synthesis inhibitors (Milekic et al. 2006), a matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) inhibitor (Brown et al. 2007), a β-noradrenergic receptor antagonist (Bernardi et al. 2006; Robinson and Franklin 2007a; Fricks-Gleason and Marshall 2008), and an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist (Kelley et al. 2007; Sadler et al. 2007) can also disrupt the reconsolidation of drug-associated CPP memories. Studies by Lee and colleagues have shown that Zif268 antisense oligodeoxynucleotide infused into the basolateral amygdala prior to reactivation of memory for a cocaine-associated cue (the conditioned stimulus or CS) disrupts the ability of cocaine-associated cues to establish subsequent acquisition of a new instrumental response (Lee et al. 2005), and the ability of a drug-associated cue to induce relapse under a second-order schedule (Lee et al. 2006a). Thus, cocaine-associated memories appear to undergo reconsolidation in both Pavlovian and operant conditioning paradigms.Relapse to drug-seeking or drug-taking behavior can occur after re-exposure to three types of stimuli: the drug itself, drug-associated contextual and discrete cues, and stress; and all of these may promote relapse in humans (for review, see Epstein et al. 2006). Only a few CPP studies (Valjent et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2007) and no self-administration studies to our knowledge have tested whether the drug-associated memory can be rendered susceptible to disruption by pharmacological agents such that subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement is suppressed. This drug-primed effect is observed in humans, producing relapse (Ludwig et al. 1974; Jaffe et al. 1989), and in rats, producing robust reinstatement of drug-seeking behavior in both CPP and self-administration tasks (McFarland and Ettenberg 1997; McFarland and Kalivas 2001; Sanchez and Sorg 2001; Kalivas and McFarland 2003). The development of a treatment strategy that makes use of the reconsolidation process will ultimately need to be powerful enough to diminish drug-seeking behavior in the presence of sizable doses of the drug itself. Therefore, the primary goal of this study was to determine whether drug-primed reinstatement could be suppressed in rats that have the memory reactivated in the presence of a pharmacological agent in cocaine self-administering rats. Since we previously have demonstrated the ability to disrupt cocaine-primed reinstatement only in animals in which the memory was reactivated using cocaine-induced CPP, we also tested the extent to which the same parameters used to disrupt reconsolidation in a cocaine-induced CPP task would disrupt reconsolidation in a cocaine self-administration task under conditions of drug-induced reinstatement.To examine this question, we chose the noncompetitive NMDA receptor antagonist (+)-5-methyl-10,11-dihydro-5H-dibenzo[a,d]cyclohepten-5,10-imine maleate (MK-801). MK-801 has been shown to disrupt reconsolidation of spatial tasks (Przybyslawski and Sara 1997), fear tasks (Lee et al. 2006b), amphetamine-induced CPP (Sadler et al. 2007), cocaine-induced CPP (Kelley et al. 2007), and sucrose self-administration (Lee and Everitt 2008). Importantly, the two studies examining CPP using MK-801 did not explore whether MK-801 suppressed drug-seeking behavior in a manner that was dependent on whether the memory was reactivated, leaving open the possibility that it was not a reconsolidation process that was disrupted by MK-801.Here we demonstrate that MK-801 injected prior to cocaine-primed reinstatement of CPP disrupted subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement of CPP, and this disruption was dependent on CPP contextual reactivation since injection of MK-801 and cocaine in the home cage did not disrupt subsequent cocaine-primed reinstatement of CPP. However, drug-seeking behavior in animals trained for cocaine self-administration was not disrupted when rats were reactivated under the same parameters that disrupted cocaine-induced CPP or when rats were given a reactivation session identical to their self-administration sessions. We thus demonstrate for the first time that memories associated with cocaine-induced CPP and cocaine self-administration are not similarly susceptible to disruption by MK-801.     

Memory for individual items is related to nonreinforced preference change

It is commonly assumed that memories contribute to value-based decisions. Nevertheless, most theories of value-based decision-making do not account for memory influences on choice. Recently, new interest has emerged in the interactions between these two fundamental processes, mainly using reinforcement-based paradigms. Here, we aimed to study the role memory processes play in preference change following the nonreinforced cue-approach training (CAT) paradigm. In CAT, the mere association of cued items with a speeded motor response influences choices. Previous studies with this paradigm showed that a single training session induces a long-lasting effect of enhanced preferences for high-value trained stimuli, that is maintained for several months. We hypothesized that CAT increases memory of trained items, leading to enhanced accessibility of their positive associative memories and in turn to preference changes. In two preregistered experiments, we found evidence that memory is enhanced for trained items and that better memory is correlated with enhanced preferences at the individual item level, both immediately and 1 mo following CAT. Our findings suggest that memory plays a central role in value-based decision-making following CAT, even in the absence of external reinforcements. These findings contribute to new theories relating memory and value-based decision-making and set the groundwork for the implementation of novel nonreinforced behavioral interventions that lead to long-lasting behavioral change.

Value-based decision-making and memory are both extensively studied processes in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience (Fellows 2017). Most theories of value-based decision-making have focused on processes related to the incremental learning of value following external reinforcement, but have not explicitly addressed the role of memory per se. Thus, fundamental questions remain regarding interactions between memory and value-based decisions, which have been gaining attention in recent years.Several recent empirical studies have demonstrated interactions between episodic memory and value-based decision-making. For example, memory for past events has been shown to bias value-based decisions (Duncan and Shohamy 2016), differently for choices of novel versus choices of familiar options (Duncan et al. 2019), and choice behavior and fMRI signals during value-based decision-making were better explained by episodic memory for individual past choices than by a standard reinforcement learning model (Bornstein et al. 2017). Another study has found that during sampling of episodic memories of previous choices, the retrieved context influenced present choices, deviating from the predictions of standard reinforcement learning models (Bornstein and Norman 2017). Other studies have demonstrated that the long time known effect of choices on future preferences is related to memory processes (Chammat et al. 2017; DuBrow et al. 2019; Luettgau et al. 2020). At the neural level, the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and the hippocampus both have been shown to play a role in memory processes and value-based decisions (Weilbächer and Gluth 2017) and recent studies have been further emphasizing that the hippocampus bridges between past experience and future decisions (Bakkour et al. 2019; Biderman et al. 2020).All these studies, and many others, highlighted the interaction between memory and value-based decision-making involving external reinforcements. However, everyday life involves decisions and associations that are not directly reinforced. Thus, it remains unclear whether memory plays a general role in value-based decision-making even without external reinforcements.To better understand the role of memory processes in shaping preferences independently of external reinforcements, we used a novel behavioral change paradigm, named cue-approach training (CAT). In this paradigm, associating images of items with a neutral cue and a speeded motor response results in a consistent preference enhancement without external reinforcement, which is maintained for months (Schonberg et al. 2014; Bakkour et al. 2018; Salomon et al. 2018, 2019; Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020). During CAT, images of items are consistently paired with a neutral cue and a speeded motor response (“Go items”), while other items are presented without the cue or the response (“NoGo items”). One training session with several presentations of all items leads to long-lasting preference changes, measured as the likelihood of choosing Go over NoGo items that had similar initial subjective values (Schonberg et al. 2014). Results from over 30 samples with this paradigm have demonstrated a replicable effect on various types of stimuli, including snack food items, fruits and vegetables, unfamiliar faces, fractal art images, and positive affective images (Bakkour et al. 2016, 2017; Veling et al. 2017; Zoltak et al. 2017; Bakkour et al. 2018; Salomon et al. 2018, 2019; Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020), revealing the potential of the CAT paradigm as an experimental platform for value-based decision-making without external reinforcements (Schonberg and Katz 2020).The underlying mechanisms of the change of preferences following CAT are not yet fully understood (Schonberg et al. 2014; Bakkour et al. 2017; Salomon et al. 2019; Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020; Schonberg and Katz 2020). The long-lasting nature of the effect, which has been shown to last for up to 6 mo following a single training session (Schonberg et al. 2014; Salomon et al. 2018, 2019; Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020), raises the hypothesis that memory processes are involved in its maintenance. Furthermore, previous studies have found enhanced memory for Go compared with NoGo items with other types of Go–NoGo tasks (Chiu and Egner 2015a,b; Yebra et al. 2019) and for items for which participants have a sense of agency (Murty et al. 2015). One recent study provided preliminary evidence suggesting that memory is involved in preference change following a similar nonreinforced Go/NoGo training task (Chen et al. 2021).We hypothesized that CAT enhances memory of Go items, which in turn leads to preferring these items over NoGo items. Previous neuroimaging findings with CAT that suggested possible interactions between hippocampal fMRI activity and subsequent preferences 1 mo following CAT, provide additional evidence in support of this hypothesis (Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020). Therefore, here we set out to test the role memory processes play in the behavioral change of preferences following CAT, in the short and in the long term.We propose an underlying mechanism for the CAT effect, in which preference change following CAT results from a boost in memory encoding of positive Go items, which in itself is a consequence of enhanced perceptual processing of Go items (Schonberg et al. 2014; Botvinik-Nezer et al. 2020). We hypothesize that the enhanced encoding of Go items, as well as the greater perceptual activation in response to them, increases accessibility of attributes and associations of these specific Go items (Anderson 1983; Bhatia 2013). Furthermore, we hypothesized that preference changes, reflected in the binary choice phase, are due to the enhanced accessibility of memory associations of the Go items, which tips the scales in favor of the Go items when the associations are positive.In order to test memory for individual items, in the current work we introduced a memory recognition task following CAT. In two independent preregistered experiments and one pilot experiment, memory was evaluated following a long (16 repetitions) or short (a single exposure) CAT training session, before the probe phase that evaluated post-training preferences. We then tested our predictions that (1) memory will be stronger for Go compared with NoGo items following CAT (more accurate and faster responses in the recognition task) and (2) that memory will be related to choices (better remembered Go items will be chosen over worse remembered NoGo items). Since the link between better memory and enhanced choices is hypothesized to be related to positive associated memories, we tested the relationship between memory and choices separately for choices between low-value and choices between high-value items. These hypotheses were tested both in the short term (immediately or a few days after CAT) and in a 1-mo follow-up.     

Intrahippocampal infusions of anisomycin produce amnesia: Contribution of increased release of norepinephrine,dopamine, and acetylcholine

Intra-amygdala injections of anisomycin produce large increases in the release of norepinephrine (NE), dopamine (DA), and serotonin in the amygdala. Pretreatment with intra-amygdala injections of the β-adrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol attenuates anisomycin-induced amnesia without reversing the inhibition of protein synthesis, and injections of NE alone produce amnesia. These findings suggest that abnormal neurotransmitter responses may be the basis for amnesia produced by inhibition of protein synthesis. The present experiment extends these findings to the hippocampus and adds acetylcholine (ACh) to the list of neurotransmitters affected by anisomycin. Using in vivo microdialysis at the site of injection, release of NE, DA, and ACh was measured before and after injections of anisomycin into the hippocampus. Anisomycin impaired inhibitory avoidance memory when rats were tested 48 h after training and also produced substantial increases in local release of NE, DA, and ACh. In an additional experiment, pretreatment with intrahippocampal injections of propranolol prior to anisomycin and training significantly attenuated anisomycin-induced amnesia. The disruption of neurotransmitter release patterns at the site of injection appears to contribute significantly to the mechanisms underlying amnesia produced by protein synthesis inhibitors, calling into question the dominant interpretation that the amnesia reflects loss of training-initiated protein synthesis necessary for memory formation. Instead, the findings suggest that proteins needed for memory formation are available prior to an experience, and that post-translational modifications of these proteins may be sufficient to enable the formation of new memories.A dominant view of the molecular basis for memory is that the formation of long-term memory for an experience depends on de novo protein synthesis initiated by that experience (Davis and Squire 1984; Frey and Morris 1998; Kandel 2001; Dudai 2002; Nader 2003; Alberini 2008). This view is supported by numerous studies showing that drugs that interfere with protein synthesis by inhibiting translational processes near the time of training produce later amnesia.Despite the centrality of experience-induced protein synthesis in contemporary models of memory formation, the necessity of protein synthesis for memory consolidation and long-term potentiation (LTP) stabilization has been questioned since the beginning of experiments of this type (e.g., Flexner and Goodman 1975; Barraco and Stettner 1976; Flood et al. 1978; Martinez et al. 1981), and continues to be questioned in several recent reviews (Routtenberg and Rekart 2005; Gold 2006, 2008; Radulovic and Tronson 2008; Routtenberg 2008; Rudy 2008). There are many instances of intact memories formed in the presence of extensive inhibition of protein synthesis, and a wide range of behavioral and pharmacological manipulations can rescue memory impaired by protein synthesis inhibitors. For example, amnesia is attenuated in a graded manner by increasing the training trials and foot shock intensity in avoidance tasks (Flood et al. 1975, 1978). Moreover, a wide range of stimulants, such as amphetamine, strychnine, corticosteroids, and caffeine, block amnesia induced by anisomycin (Flood et al. 1978). Like memory, LTP is sometimes insensitive to protein synthesis inhibitors. Simultaneous inhibition of both protein synthesis and degradation does not interfere with induction and maintenance of LTP (Fonseca et al. 2006a). Also, the specific schedule and frequency of test pulses after induction of LTP determine the vulnerability of LTP to anisomycin-induced impairment; anisomycin treatment does not impair LTP unless test pulses at a rate of 1/10 sec were administered during the anisomycin exposure (Fonseca et al. 2006b).Findings that memory and LTP can survive the inhibition of protein synthesis challenge the necessity of specific training- or stimulation-initiated protein synthesis for memory formation and synaptic plasticity. Several actions of protein synthesis inhibitors offer alternative accounts for amnesia produced by these drugs. These include cell sickness (Rudy et al. 2006; Rudy 2008), activation of protein kinases and superinduction of immediate early genes (Radulovic and Tronson 2008), abnormal neural electrical activity (Agnihotri et al. 2004; Xu et al. 2005), and intrusion of neural “noise” that masks the primary changes representing memory formation (Gold 2006). Neural responses to inhibition of protein synthesis such as these may impair memory either secondary to or independent of interference with protein synthesis.Another example of the mechanisms by which inhibition of protein synthesis might impair memory is by altering neurotransmitter functions. This possibility was suggested in early studies (e.g., Flexner and Goodman 1975; Quartermain et al. 1977) and has recently been supported by studies of neurotransmitter release at the site of intra-amygdala injections of anisomycin (Canal et al. 2007). In addition to impairing later memory after inhibitory avoidance training, pretraining injections of anisomycin into the amygdala produced rapid and dramatic increases in release of norepinephrine (NE), dopamine (DA), and serotonin (5-HT) at the sites of injection. The release of NE and DA then plummeted below baselines from 2 to 6 h after anisomycin injections, recovering within 48 h after anisomycin injection. The possibility that these neurochemical changes contribute to anisomycin-induced amnesia was supported by studies showing attenuation of amnesia in rats pretreated with intra-amygdala injections of the β-adrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol, apparently acting to blunt the effects of the large increases in release of NE after anisomycin injection. In addition, amnesia was produced by injections of high doses of norepinephrine into the amygdala.In addition to amnesias produced by anisomycin injections into the amygdala, as above, anisomycin also impairs memory when administered to other memory systems, including the hippocampus, where anisomycin impairs inhibitory avoidance memory (Quevedo et al. 1999; Debiec et al. 2002; Milekic et al. 2006). The present study extends the prior findings (Canal et al. 2007) in several respects. Experiments presented here determine whether anisomycin injections into the hippocampus result in changes in release of the catecholamines, NE and DA, at the site of injection, as seen previously in the amygdala. Additionally, the present experiments determine whether intrahippocampal injections of anisomycin result in increased release of acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter not examined in the previous study. To examine parallels with earlier amygdala findings, a further experiment determines whether intrahippocampal pretreatment with propranolol is effective in attenuating anisomycin-induced amnesia.     

The basolateral amygdala and nucleus accumbens core mediate dissociable aspects of drug memory reconsolidation

A distributed limbic-corticostriatal circuitry is implicated in cue-induced drug craving and relapse. Exposure to drug-paired cues not only precipitates relapse, but also triggers the reactivation and reconsolidation of the cue-drug memory. However, the limbic cortical-striatal circuitry underlying drug memory reconsolidation is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the involvement of the nucleus accumbens core and the basolateral amygdala in the reconsolidation of a cocaine-conditioned stimulus-evoked memory. Antisense oligodeoxynucleotides (ASO) were infused into each structure to knock down the expression of the immediate-early gene zif268, which is known to be required for memory reconsolidation. Control infusions used missense oligodeoxynucleotides (MSO). The effects of zif268 knockdown were measured in two complementary paradigms widely used to assess the impact of drug-paired CSs upon drug seeking: the acquisition of a new instrumental response with conditioned reinforcement and conditioned place preference. The results show that both intranucleus accumbens core and intrabasolateral amygdala zif268 ASO infusions at memory reactivation impaired the reconsolidation of the memory underlying a cocaine-conditioned place preference. However, knockdown of zif268 in the nucleus accumbens at memory reactivation had no effect on the memory underlying the conditioned reinforcing properties of the cocaine-paired CS measured subsequently, and this is in contrast to the marked impairment observed previously following intrabasolateral amygdala zif268 ASO infusions. These results suggest that both the basolateral amygdala and nucleus accumbens core are key structures within limbic cortical-striatal circuitry where reconsolidation of a cue-drug memory occurs. However reconsolidation of memory representations formed during Pavlovian conditioning are differentially localized in each site.Through Pavlovian association with the effects of addictive drugs, a conditioned stimulus (CS) acquires both general motivational and sensory-specific conditioned reinforcing properties (Everitt et al. 2000). These associations contribute to the high likelihood of relapse in addicted individuals, yet the extinction of drug CSs by nonreinforced exposure has proved to be of limited therapeutic utility (Conklin and Tiffany 2002). In abstinent humans, drug CSs evoke salient and persistent memories of drug-taking experiences, inducing craving and relapse (Childress et al. 1988; O''Brien et al. 1992), while in animals they also precipitate relapse to, or reinstatement of, drug-seeking behavior (de Wit and Stewart 1981; Meil and See 1996; Fuchs et al. 1998; Weiss 2000). Thus, disrupting drug-related memories might significantly diminish relapse propensity on subsequent exposure to drug-paired CSs, and thereby promote abstinence.Exposure to a drug-associated CS also triggers a process of memory reconsolidation, which restabilizes the reactivated and labile memory (Nader 2003). While reconsolidation may adaptively update memories (Dudai 2006; Hupbach et al. 2007; Rossato et al. 2007; Lee 2009), its disruption may reduce the impact of intrusive or aberrant memories on behavior subsequently (Lee et al. 2005, 2006; Brunet et al. 2008; Kindt et al. 2009; Taubenfeld et al. 2009). The reconsolidation of CS–cocaine memories has been shown to depend upon protein synthesis and expression of the plasticity-associated immediate-early gene, zif268, in the basolateral amygdala (BLA), since zif268 knockdown at memory reactivation disrupted the acquired conditioned reinforcing properties of the CS measured in drug-seeking tasks days or weeks later (Lee et al. 2005, 2006).Although the BLA has an established role in CS-drug memory reconsolidation, it remains unclear whether other sites within limbic cortical-ventral striatal circuitry participate in this process. The nucleus accumbens core (AcbC) is a primary candidate, as zif268 is up-regulated in the AcbC as well as in the BLA following exposure to cocaine CSs (Thomas et al. 2003). Furthermore, the AcbC, which is strongly implicated in Pavlovian influences on drug seeking and relapse (Cardinal et al. 2002; Kalivas and McFarland 2003), has been shown to be a site where the reconsolidation of a drug conditioned place preference (CPP) memory can be disrupted (Miller and Marshall 2005).Given the evidence of increased zif268 expression in the AcbC following CS-drug memory reactivation, we investigated its requirement in the reconsolidation of cocaine-associated memories. To address this issue, we employed two different but complementary paradigms widely used to measure the conditioned effects of CSs associated with drugs of abuse: the acquisition of a new instrumental response with conditioned reinforcement (ANR) and CPP. These procedures have been used successfully to investigate the mechanisms underlying the reconsolidation of appetitive Pavlovian memories, but it is likely that they depend upon different associative mechanisms (Everitt et al. 1991; White and McDonald 1993) that in turn depend upon different neural loci within limbic cortical-striatal circuitry (Cardinal et al. 2002). Therefore, to enable a full comparison with the functional involvement of the BLA, we investigated the necessity for BLA zif268 expression in drug memory reconsolidation as assessed in the CPP paradigm.     

Recognition memory: Adding a response deadline eliminates recollection but spares familiarity

A current controversy in memory research concerns whether recognition is supported by distinct processes of familiarity and recollection, or instead by a single process wherein familiarity and recollection reflect weak and strong memories, respectively. Recent studies using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses in an animal model have shown that manipulations of the memory demands can eliminate the contribution of familiarity while sparing recollection. Here it is shown that a different manipulation, specifically the addition of a response deadline in recognition testing, results in the opposite performance pattern, eliminating the contribution of recollection while sparing that of familiarity. This dissociation, combined with the earlier findings, demonstrates that familiarity and recollection are differentially sensitive to specific memory demands, strongly supporting the dual process view.Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis holds the promise of dissecting the contributions to recognition memory of episodic recollection and familiarity (Yonelinas 2001), and this method can be applied equally well to examine these memory processes in animals as well as humans (Fortin et al. 2004; Sauvage et al. 2008). According to the dual process model, recollection is indexed by the asymmetry of the ROC function whereas familiarity is measured by the degree of curvilinearity of that function, and correspondingly, these two parameters can vary independently (Yonelinas 2001). However, there is controversy about this interpretation of ROC components. Some have argued that the asymmetry and curvilinearity of the ROC function both reflect the strength of memories mediated by a single process (Wixted 2007), and correspondingly, these components of the ROC increase or decrease together in stronger or weaker memories, respectively (Squire et al. 2007).A resolution of this controversy can be advanced by examining whether the ROC asymmetry and curvilinearity are independently influenced by task manipulations that favor either recollection or familiarity, consistent with dual process theory, or instead are similarly influenced by conditions that affect memory strength. Recent data from an animal model of recognition have shown that adding a demand for remembering associations between independent stimuli eliminates the ROC curvilinearity without affecting the asymmetry, consistent with the dual process view (Sauvage et al. 2008; for discussion of associative recognition, see Mayes et al. 2007). However, in order to provide compelling evidence of independence of the two ROC components, it is also critical to show that other memory demands that favor familiarity produce the opposite pattern, elimination of the ROC asymmetry while sparing its curvilinearity. Together these findings would constitute a double dissociation between the two parameters of the ROC function that cannot be explained by a single process theory.As originally conceived in models proposed in the 1970s, familiarity is characterized as a perceptually driven, pattern matching process that is completed rapidly, whereas recollection is characterized as a conceptually driven, organizational process that requires more time (Mandler 1972; Atkinson and Juola 1973, 1974; for reviews, see Yonelinas 2002; Mandler 2008). Consistent with this view, the results of several studies that employ response deadlines in the test phase report that familiarity is more rapid than recollection. For example, forcing people to make speeded recognition responses has little effect on simple yes–no recognition but strikingly reduces performance when subjects must remember where or when an item was studied (Yonelinas and Jacoby 1994; Gronlund et al. 1997; Hintzman et al. 1998). Other studies that require subjects to oppose familiarity and recollection reveal a two-component temporal function that includes a rapidly available familiarity process and a slower recollective process (Dosher 1984; Gronlund and Ratcliff 1989; Hintzman and Curran 1994; McElree et al. 1999). In addition, studies that measure brain evoked response potentials (ERPs) have revealed two distinct ERP modulations commonly observed during recognition: a mid-frontal negativity onsetting about 400 msec after stimulus onset that is associated with familiarity, and a parietally distributed positivity beginning about 500 msec after stimulus onset that is associated with recollection (Smith 1993; Duzel et al. 1997; Curran 2004; Duarte et al. 2006; Woodruff et al. 2006; but see Voss and Paller 2009).Dual process theory predicts that applying an appropriate early response deadline should allow sufficient time for contribution of familiarity but not that of recollection, and so should reduce the ROC asymmetry while sparing its curvilinearity, opposite to the already observed effects of associative memory demands that favor recollection (Sauvage et al. 2008). Confirmation of this prediction combined with the previous findings of the opposite effects in associative recognition would constitute a double dissociation between the features of recollection and familiarity. This result would therefore strongly support the conclusion that the asymmetry and curvilinearity are independent parameters of the ROC function that are differentially linked to features of recollection and familiarity, respectively.     

Reciprocal patterns of c-Fos expression in the medial prefrontal cortex and amygdala after extinction and renewal of conditioned fear

After extinction of conditioned fear, memory for the conditioning and extinction experiences becomes context dependent. Fear is suppressed in the extinction context, but renews in other contexts. This study characterizes the neural circuitry underlying the context-dependent retrieval of extinguished fear memories using c-Fos immunohistochemistry. After fear conditioning and extinction to an auditory conditioned stimulus (CS), rats were presented with the extinguished CS in either the extinction context or a second context, and then sacrificed. Presentation of the CS in the extinction context yielded low levels of conditioned freezing and induced c-Fos expression in the infralimbic division of the medial prefrontal cortex, the intercalated nuclei of the amygdala, and the dentate gyrus (DG). In contrast, presentation of the CS outside of the extinction context yielded high levels of conditioned freezing and induced c-Fos expression in the prelimbic division of the medial prefrontal cortex, the lateral and basolateral nuclei of the amygdala, and the medial division of the central nucleus of the amygdala. Hippocampal areas CA1 and CA3 exhibited c-Fos expression when the CS was presented in either context. These data suggest that the context specificity of extinction is mediated by prefrontal modulation of amygdala activity, and that the hippocampus has a fundamental role in contextual memory retrieval.Considerable interest has emerged in recent years in the neural mechanisms underlying the associative extinction of learned fear (Maren and Quirk 2004; Myers et al. 2006; Quirk and Mueller 2008). Notably, extinction is a useful model for important aspects of exposure-based therapies for the treatment of human anxiety disorders such as panic disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Bouton et al. 2001, 2006). During extinction, a conditioned stimulus (CS) is repeatedly presented in the absence of the unconditioned stimulus (US), a procedure that greatly reduces the magnitude and probability of the conditioned response (CR). After the extinction of fear, there is substantial evidence that extinction does not erase the original fear memory, but results in a transient inhibition of fear. For example, extinguished fear responses return after the mere passage of time (i.e., spontaneous recovery) or after a change in context (i.e., renewal) (Bouton et al. 2006; Ji and Maren 2007). In other words, extinguished fear is context specific. The return of fear after extinction is a considerable challenge for maintaining long-lasting fear suppression after exposure-based therapies (Rodriguez et al. 1999; Hermans et al. 2006; Effting and Kindt 2007; Quirk and Mueller 2008).In the last several years, considerable progress has been made in understanding the neural mechanisms underlying the context specificity of fear extinction. For example, lesions or inactivation of the hippocampus prevent the renewal of fear when an extinguished CS is presented outside of the extinction context (Corcoran and Maren 2001, 2004; Corcoran et al. 2005; Ji and Maren 2005, 2008; Hobin et al. 2006). In addition, neurons in the basolateral complex of the amygdala exhibit context-specific spike firing to extinguished CSs (Hobin et al. 2003; Herry et al. 2008), and this requires hippocampal input (Maren and Hobin 2007). Indeed, amygdala neurons that fire more to extinguished CSs outside of the extinction context are monosynaptically excited by hippocampal stimulation (Herry et al. 2008). In contrast, neurons that responded preferentially to extinguished CSs in the extinction context receive synaptic input from the medial prefrontal cortex (Herry et al. 2008).The prevalent theory of the interactions between the prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, and amygdala that lead to regulation of fear by context assumes that when animals experience an extinguished CS in the extinction context, the hippocampus drives prefrontal cortex inhibition of the amygdala to suppress fear (Hobin et al. 2003; Maren and Quirk 2004; Maren 2005). When animals encounter an extinguished CS outside of the extinction context, the hippocampus is posited to inhibit the prefrontal cortex and thereby promote amygdala activity required to renew fear. The hippocampus may also drive fear renewal through its direct projections to the basolateral amygdala (Herry et al. 2008). Although this model accounts for much of the extant literature on the context specificity of extinction, it is not known whether the nodes of this hypothesized neural network are coactive during the retrieval of fear and extinction memories. As a first step in addressing this issue, we used ex vivo c-Fos immunohistochemistry (e.g., Knapska et al. 2007) to generate a functional map of the neural circuits involved in the contextual retrieval of fear memory after extinction. Our results reveal reciprocal activity in prefrontal-amygdala circuits involved in extinction and renewal and implicate the hippocampus in hierarchical control of contextual memory retrieval within these circuits.     

Physiological effects of enriched environment exposure and LTP induction in the hippocampus in vivo do not transfer faithfully to in vitro slices

A number of experimental paradigms use in vitro brain slices to test for changes in synaptic transmission and plasticity following a behavioral manipulation. For example, a number of previous studies have reported a variety of effects of environmental enrichment (EE) exposure on field potential responses in hippocampal slices, but in no study was is it known what changes had been elicited in vivo. In the present study, we recorded from the hippocampus in vivo while rats underwent a brief period of EE. There was no detectable EE-induced change in synaptic efficacy in the dentate gyrus in vivo, but there was an increase in cellular excitability. In slices prepared from the same animals, we failed to observe any evidence of the excitability increase. We next tested whether LTP induction in vivo was better preserved in vitro. However, when slices from these rats were examined, there was no observable change in perforant path synaptic strength, although there was a modest increase in excitability that correlated with the increased excitability observed in vivo. These findings suggest that synaptic changes induced in vivo either are not preserved faithfully or are difficult to detect in hippocampal slices, while changes in cellular excitability are better preserved.Exposure to an enriched environment (EE) can improve performance on a variety of hippocampus-dependent memory tasks in both normal (Kempermann et al. 1997; Duffy et al. 2001; Teather et al. 2002; Schrijver et al. 2004; Irvine and Abraham 2005) and disease model (Ohlsson and Johansson 1995; Young et al. 1999; Jankowsky et al. 2005; Lazarov et al. 2005; Nithianantharajah and Hannan 2006; Laviola et al. 2008) animals. Previous studies attempting to understand the physiological changes that mediate these effects have yielded mixed results, which may in part be due to the variability in enrichment paradigms used in different laboratories, but which may also be due to the method used to measure hippocampal physiology.Traditionally, researchers have studied the effects of EE using ex vivo brain slices. Such studies have sometimes reported an increase in synaptic strength following enrichment (Green and Greenough 1986; Foster et al. 1996; Foster and Dumas 2001), but a lack of a change has also been observed (Duffy et al. 2001; Feng et al. 2001; Parsley et al. 2007). The ex vivo approach is predicated on the assumption that EE (or other behavioral) treatment induces changes in neural function that are of sufficient magnitude and extent that they will still be present when the brain is removed and studied in vitro. However, there could be many hidden effects of slice preparation (Kirov et al. 2004) that change or obscure effects occurring in vivo.In a previous study, we were surprised to find few effects of a 3-mo EE treatment on hippocampal synaptic function and plasticity when assessed in vitro (Eckert et al. 2010), despite our having observed with in vivo recordings substantial effects with shorter periods of EE exposure (Irvine and Abraham 2005; Irvine et al. 2006). We therefore considered the possibility that effects measured electrophysiologically in vivo may not be readily detectable in vitro. Testing this hypothesis requires studying the same animals in vivo and in vitro, a control procedure we are not aware of having been reported previously in the literature. In the present study, we examined whether the effects of EE or LTP induction in vivo could be detected in hippocampal slices taken from the same animals. We failed to detect any of the in vivo changes, except for a modest increase in cellular excitability following LTP.     

Sleep spectral power correlates of prospective memory maintenance

Prospective memory involves setting an intention to act that is maintained over time and executed when appropriate. Slow wave sleep (SWS) has been implicated in maintaining prospective memories, although which SWS oscillations most benefit this memory type remains unclear. Here, we investigated SWS spectral power correlates of prospective memory. Healthy young adult participants completed three ongoing tasks in the morning or evening. They were then given the prospective memory instruction to remember to press “Q” when viewing the words “horse” or “table” when repeating the ongoing task after a 12-h delay including overnight, polysomnographically recorded sleep or continued daytime wakefulness. Spectral power analysis was performed on recorded sleep EEG. Two additional groups were tested in the morning or evening only, serving as time-of-day controls. Participants who slept demonstrated superior prospective memory compared with those who remained awake, an effect not attributable to time-of-day of testing. Contrary to prior work, prospective memory was negatively associated with SWS. Furthermore, significant increases in spectral power in the delta-theta frequency range (1.56 Hz–6.84 Hz) during SWS was observed in participants who failed to execute the prospective memory instructions. Although sleep benefits prospective memory maintenance, this benefit may be compromised if SWS is enriched with delta–theta activity.

Prospective memory refers to the maintenance, retrieval, and execution of a previously formed intention (Einstein and McDaniel 1990). Successful prospective memory is essential for a large number of tasks in daily life, such as remembering to attend a doctor''s appointment, to pick up a prescribed medication after that appointment, and to also pick up other needed items (e.g., groceries) while at the drugstore. The above described hypothetical sequence of events integrates previously studied prospective memory variants including time-based (i.e., maintaining a memory to complete an intention at a prespecified time; e.g., Esposito et al. 2015; Occhionero et al. 2017), activity-based (i.e., maintaining a memory to perform an intention before or after a particular activity; e.g., Occhionero et al. 2020), and cue-based (i.e., relying on external cues to prompt a maintained memory for a set intention; e.g., Scullin and McDaniel 2010; Leong et al. 2019b; Scullin et al. 2019).When it is required that memories be maintained across longer periods of time, prospective memory may become less reliable unless sleep occurs (Scullin and McDaniel 2010; Diekelmann et al. 2013a,b; Grundgeiger et al. 2014; Leong et al. 2019a,b; Scullin et al. 2019). Sleep appears to most strongly aid spontaneous retrieval of cue-based prospective memories (Leong et al. 2019a). Several reports have found that slow wave sleep (SWS) supports spontaneous retrieval of cue-based prospective memory intentions (e.g., Diekelmann et al. 2013a; Leong et al. 2019b), although at least one study found an association with rapid eye movement (REM) sleep instead (Scullin et al. 2019). Cue-based prospective memory is hypothesized to be a type of associative memory that binds prospective components (the prospective memory cue) and retrospective components (maintenance of the memory for the prospective memory intention when presented with the cue; Diekelmann et al. 2013b; Leong et al. 2019a).Rodent and human literature, implementing a variety of invasive and noninvasive brain imaging techniques, show that cortical slow oscillations (SOs; <1 Hz) and fast thalamocortical sleep spindles during SWS facilitate associative memory retention (Niknazar et al. 2015; Latchoumane et al. 2017; Helfrich et al. 2018; Mikutta et al. 2019; Muehlroth et al. 2019), whereas faster oscillations, such as those in the theta frequency band (∼4–7 Hz), may inhibit declarative associative memory (Marshall et al. 2011). We therefore hypothesize that prospective memory performance, like other studied associative memory variants, should benefit from oscillations during SWS (Klinzing et al. 2019). However, it remains unknown which SWS microarchitectural features may facilitate or inhibit prospective memory performance.Here, we aimed to first replicate prior findings that prospective memories are better maintained across a 12-h interval including sleep compared with an equivalent interval of wakefulness (e.g., Scullin and McDaniel 2010). We next explored whether sleep-associated memory maintenance might be linked to SWS microarchitectural features. To our knowledge, this is the first experiment to examine whether SWS oscillations differentiate successful from unsuccessful prospective memory performance. Given the role of hippocampal engagement in both associative memory binding (e.g., Yonelinas et al. 2019) and oscillatory coupling during SWS that supports associative memory (Niknazar et al. 2015; Latchoumane et al. 2017; Helfrich et al. 2018; Mikutta et al. 2019; Muehlroth et al. 2019), we hypothesized that prospective memory performance would be supported by SWS and specifically SOs and sleep spindle activity.     

Role of amygdala and hippocampus in the neural circuit subserving conditioned defeat in Syrian hamsters

We examined the roles of the amygdala and hippocampus in the formation of emotionally relevant memories using an ethological model of conditioned fear termed conditioned defeat (CD). Temporary inactivation of the ventral, but not dorsal hippocampus (VH, DH, respectively) using muscimol disrupted the acquisition of CD, whereas pretraining VH infusions of anisomycin, a protein synthesis inhibitor, failed to block CD. To test for a functional connection between the VH and basolateral amygdala (BLA), we used a classic functional connectivity design wherein injections are made unilaterally in brain areas either on the same or opposite sides of the brain. A functional connection between the BLA and VH necessary for the acquisition of CD could not be found because unilateral inactivation of either BLA alone (but not either VH alone) was sufficient to disrupt CD. This finding suggested instead that there may be a critical functional connection between the left and right BLA. In our final experiment, we infused muscimol unilaterally in the BLA and assessed Fos immunoreactivity on the contralateral side following exposure to social defeat. Inactivation of either BLA significantly reduced defeat-induced Fos immunoreactivity in the contralateral BLA. These experiments demonstrate for the first time that whereas the VH is necessary for the acquisition of CD, it does not appear to mediate the plastic changes underlying CD. There also appears to be a critical interaction between the two BLAs such that bilateral activation of this brain area must occur in order to support fear learning in this model, a finding that is unprecedented to date.Our laboratory has taken a novel approach to examine the behavioral and physiological changes that accompany social experience by studying a striking behavioral response that is exhibited following social defeat. When a Syrian hamster is paired with a larger, more aggressive opponent and is defeated, it subsequently becomes highly submissive and fails to defend its own home cage even against a smaller, nonaggressive intruder. We call this change in the behavior of the defeated hamster conditioned defeat (CD) (Portegal et al. 1993) and believe that it is a valuable model with which to study neural and behavioral plasticity following exposure to a biologically relevant stressor.One of the critical structures subserving CD is the amygdala; temporary inactivation of its major subnuclei, including the basolateral amygdala (BLA), blocks the acquisition of CD (Jasnow and Huhman 2001). Together with the findings that protein synthesis inhibition in the BLA effectively disrupts CD (Markham and Huhman 2008) and that overexpression of cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) in the BLA enhances CD (Jasnow et al. 2005), the data support the hypothesis that the BLA is a critical site for plasticity related to CD.One brain region that we have largely overlooked, but which receives considerable attention for its role in learning and memory, is the hippocampus. Several groups have now gathered anatomical and behavioral data demonstrating functionally specific dissociation between the dorsal (DH) and ventral (VH) regions of the hippocampus (Risold and Swanson 1996; Moser and Moser 1998; Bannerman et al. 2004; McEown and Treit 2009). While the DH is critical for spatial relationships (O''Keefe and Nadel 1978; Moser et al. 1993; Eichenbaum 1996) and has been shown to play an important role in social recognition in hamsters (Lai et al. 2005), the VH appears to be involved in the production of behaviors produced in response to aversive stimuli (Trivedi and Coover 2004; Pentkowski et al. 2006).Considering how critically important the hippocampus and amygdala are in relation to fear and memory, some studies are beginning to suggest that these areas may functionally interact to modulate memory function (Akirav and Richter-Levin 2002; McGaugh et al. 2002; McGaugh 2004; Vouimba et al. 2007). The BLA projects to the hippocampus (Amaral and Insausti 1992), and high-frequency stimulation of the BLA combined with tetanic stimulation of the perforant pathway facilitates hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP) (Ikegaya et al. 1996). Additionally, electrolytic lesions of the VH produce a deficit in the acquisition of fear to a contextual conditioned stimulus, and NMDA lesions of the BLA cause a nonselective deficit in the acquisition of fear to both contextual and acoustic conditioned stimuli (Maren and Fanselow 1995). Although our laboratory has previously demonstrated that the BLA is critically involved in the acquisition of CD (Jasnow and Huhman 2001), the role of the hippocampus has yet to be investigated. The aim of the present study was to examine whether the VH and DH are involved in mediating CD and also to determine whether there is a functional interaction between the hippocampus and the amygdala in the acquisition of CD.