ArticleBehavioral neuroscience2013
Differential effects of the cannabinoid agonist WIN55,212-2 on delay and trace eyeblink conditioning.
Article in Behavioral neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential effects of two early life stress paradigms on cerebellar-dependent delay eyeblink conditioning.Neurobiology of stress · 2020Article
- Intracerebellar cannabinoid administration impairs delay but not trace eyeblink conditioning.Behavioural brain research · 2020Article
- Long-term depression of presynaptic cannabinoid receptor function at parallel fibre synapses.The Journal of physiology · 2019Article
- Cannabinoid modulation of memory consolidation within the cerebellum.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Central cannabinoid-1 receptors (CB1R) play a role in the acquisition of delay eyeblink conditioning (EBC) but not trace EBC in humans and animals. However, it is not clear why trace conditioning is immune to the effects of cannabinoid receptor compounds. The current study examined the effects of variants of delay and trace conditioning procedures to elucidate the factors that determine the effects of CB1R agonists on EBC. In Experiment 1, rats were administered the cannabinoid agonist WIN55,212-2 during delay, long-delay, or trace conditioning. Rats were impaired during delay and long-delay, but not trace conditioning; the impairment was greater for long-delay than delay conditioning. Trace conditioning was further examined in Experiment 2 by manipulating the trace interval and keeping constant the conditioned stimulus (conditional stimulus [CS]) duration. It was found that when the trace interval was 300 ms or less, WIN55,212-2 administration impaired the rate of learning. Experiment 3 tested whether the trace interval duration or the relative durations of the CS and trace interval were critical parameters influencing the effects of WIN55,212-2 on EBC. Rats were not impaired with a 100-ms CS, 200-ms trace paradigm but were impaired with a 1,000-ms CS, 500-ms trace paradigm, indicating that the duration of the trace interval does not matter, but the proportion of the interstimulus interval occupied by the CS relative to the trace period is critical. Taken together, the results indicate that cannabinoid agonists affect cerebellar learning when the CS is longer than the trace interval.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.