Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27605622›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2016

Increasing the GluN2A/GluN2B Ratio in Neurons of the Mouse Basal and Lateral Amygdala Inhibits the Modification of an Existing Fear Memory Trace.

Roopashri Holehonnur, Aarron J Phensy, Lily J Kim, Milica Milivojevic, Dat Vuong, Delvin K Daison, Saira Alex, Michael Tiner, Lauren E Jones, Sven Kroener and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Roopashri HolehonnurSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Aarron J PhensySchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Lily J KimSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Milica MilivojevicSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Dat VuongSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.ORCID 0000-0001-9960-1268
Delvin K DaisonSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Saira AlexSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.ORCID 0000-0002-5119-8649
Michael TinerSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Lauren E JonesSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.
Sven KroenerSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080.ORCID 0000-0003-1728-8111
Jonathan E PloskiSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, The University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas 75080 Jonathan.Ploski@UTDallas.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6242-9353
The University of Texas at Dallas · US

Funding

Molecular Mechanisms of Reconsolidation BoundariesR21MH096202 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DALLAS · PI PLOSKI, JONATHAN E · 2012 to 2013
$412k
NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH096202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledReconsolidation updating is a form of memory modification in which an existing memory can become destabilized upon retrieval and subsequently be modified via protein-synthesis-dependent reconsolidation. However, not all memories appear to destabilize upon retrieval and thus are not modifiable via reconsolidation updating approaches and the neurobiological basis for this remains poorly understood. Here, we report that auditory fear memories created with 10 tone-shock pairings are resistant to retrieval-dependent memory destabilization and are associated with an increase in the synaptic GluN2A/GluN2B ratio in neurons of the basal and lateral amygdala (BLA) compared with weaker fear memories created via one or three tone-shock pairings. To increase the GluN2A/GluN2B ratio after learning, we generated a line of mice that expresses an inducible and doxycycline-dependent GFP-GluN2A transgene specifically in α-CaMKII-positive neurons. Our findings indicate that increasing the GluN2A/GluN2B ratio in BLA α-CaMKII-positive neurons after a weak fear memory has consolidated inhibits retrieval-dependent memory destabilization and modification of the fear memory trace. This was associated with a reduction in retrieval-dependent AMPA receptor trafficking, as evidenced by a reduction in retrieval-dependent phosphorylation of GluR1 at serine-845. In addition, we determined that increasing the GluN2A/GluN2B ratio before fear learning significantly impaired long term memory consolidation, whereas short-term memory remained unaltered. An increase in the GluN2A/GluN2B ratio after fear learning had no influence on fear extinction or expression. Our results underscore the importance of NMDAR subunit composition for memory destabilization and suggest a mechanism for why some memories are resistant to modification. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Memory modification using reconsolidation updating is being examined as one of the potential treatment approaches for attenuating maladaptive memories associated with emotional disorders. However, studies have shown that, whereas weak memories can be modified using reconsolidation updating, strong memories can be resistant to this approach. Therefore, treatments targeting the reconsolidation process are unlikely to be clinically effective unless methods are devised to enhance retrieval-dependent memory destabilization. Currently, little is known about the cellular and molecular events that influence the induction of reconsolidation updating. Here, we determined that an increase in the GluN2A/GluN2B ratio interferes with retrieval-dependent memory destabilization and inhibits the initiation of reconsolidation updating.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAmygdalaAnalysis of VarianceAnimalsAnisomycinCalcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2Disks Large Homolog 4 ProteinExcitatory Amino Acid AgentsExtinction, PsychologicalFearFemaleGuanylate KinasesMaleMembrane ProteinsMemoryMental RecallAnisomycinCalcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2Disks Large Homolog 4 ProteinDlg4 protein, mouseExcitatory Amino Acid AgentsGuanylate KinasesMembrane ProteinsNR2B NMDA receptorProtein Synthesis InhibitorsReceptors, N-Methyl-D-AspartateamygdalaGlun2AmemoryNMDARPavlovian fear conditioningreconsolidation

Identifiers

PMID27605622
PMCPMC5013194
OpenAlexW2515895741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.