Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33841124›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in synaptic neuroscience2021

A Synaptic Framework for the Persistence of Memory Engrams.

Priyanka Rao-Ruiz, Esther Visser, Miodrag Mitrić, August B Smit, Michel C van den Oever

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in synaptic neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. CA1 Engram Cell Dynamics Before and After Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Uncertainty-Gated Min-Cost Flows forbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Synapse-specific structural plasticity that protects and refines local circuits during LTP and LTD.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  17. Activation of GeNeuro · 2024
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Priyanka Rao-RuizDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Esther VisserDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Miodrag MitrićDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
August B SmitDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Michel C van den OeverDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Amsterdam Neuroscience · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to store and retrieve learned information over prolonged periods of time is an essential and intriguing property of the brain. Insight into the neurobiological mechanisms that underlie memory consolidation is of utmost importance for our understanding of memory persistence and how this is affected in memory disorders. Recent evidence indicates that a given memory is encoded by sparsely distributed neurons that become highly activated during learning, so-called engram cells. Research by us and others confirms the persistent nature of cortical engram cells by showing that these neurons are required for memory expression up to at least 1 month after they were activated during learning. Strengthened synaptic connectivity between engram cells is thought to ensure reactivation of the engram cell network during retrieval. However, given the continuous integration of new information into existing neuronal circuits and the relatively rapid turnover rate of synaptic proteins, it is unclear whether a lasting learning-induced increase in synaptic connectivity is mediated by stable synapses or by continuous dynamic turnover of synapses of the engram cell network. Here, we first discuss evidence for the persistence of engram cells and memory-relevant adaptations in synaptic plasticity, and then propose models of synaptic adaptations and molecular mechanisms that may support memory persistence through the maintenance of enhanced synaptic connectivity within an engram cell network.

Indexed as

cellular feedback loopsengram cell networkmemory engrammemory persistencesynaptic connectivity

Identifiers

PMID33841124
PMCPMC8024575
OpenAlexW3137158636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.