ArticlePloS one2016
Role of Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptors in Serial Feature-Positive Discrimination Task during Eyeblink Conditioning in Mice.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combination of epigallocatechin 3 gallate and curcumin improves D-galactose and normal-aging associated memory impairment in mice.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Curcumin improves D-galactose and normal-aging associated memory impairment in mice: In vivo and in silico-based studies.PloS one · 2022Article
- Blockade of the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors impairs eyeblink serial feature-positive discrimination learning in mice.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the role of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) in eyeblink serial feature-positive discrimination learning in mice using the mAChR antagonist. A 2-s light cue was delivered 5 or 6 s before the presentation of a 350-ms tone paired with a 100-ms periorbital electrical shock (cued trial) but not before the tone-alone presentation (non-cued trial). Mice received 30 cued and 30 non-cued trials each day in a random order. We found that saline-injected control mice were successfully discriminating between cued and non-cued trials within a few days of conditioning. The mice responded more frequently to the tone in cued trials than in non-cued trials. Analysis of conditioned response (CR) dynamics revealed that the CR onset latency was shorter in cued trials than in non-cued trials, despite the CR peak amplitude not differing significantly between the two conditions. In contrast, scopolamine-injected mice developed an equal number of CRs with similar temporal patterns irrespective of the presence of the cue during the 7 days of conditioning, indicating in a failure to acquire conditional discrimination. In addition, the scopolamine administration to the control mice after they had successfully acquired discrimination did not impair the conditional discrimination and expression of pre-acquired CR. These results suggest that mAChRs may play a pivotal role in memory formation in the conditional brain state associated with the feature cue; however they are unlikely to be involved in the development of discrimination after conditional memory had formed in the serial feature-positive discrimination task during eyeblink conditioning.
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.