Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40576679›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2025

Andrographolide increases adult hippocampal neurogenesis and prolongs contextual fear memory.

Laura F Jaimes, Matheus C Passos, Lara M Z Mansk, Caio M de Castro, Julián T F Vega, Leonardo de O Guarnieri, Flávio A G Mourão, Alexander Birbrair, Victor R Santos, Márcio F D Moraes and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Laura F JaimesNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Matheus C PassosNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Lara M Z ManskNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Caio M de CastroNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Julián T F VegaNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Leonardo de O GuarnieriNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Flávio A G MourãoNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Alexander BirbrairDermatology Research Laboratories, The School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Victor R SantosDepartamento de Morfologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Márcio F D MoraesNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil.
Grace S PereiraNúcleo de Neurociências, Departamento de Fisiologia e Biofísica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627- CEP, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil. grace@icb.ufmg.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4371-7020

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 406727/2021-0Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 407503/2023-4Fundação Amparo e Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa APQ-01646-18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleAdult neurogenesis in the brain enhances memory retention, particularly under conditions of compromised hippocampal function. However, it is unclear whether changing neurogenesis levels would affect the longevity of a physiological memory trace.

objectiveHere, we hypothesized that the mechanisms of potentially pro-neurogenic treatments and the nature of the memory trace are determinant factors in defining whether memories persist.

methodsWe subjected adult male C57Bl/6 mice to behavioral procedures that evoke fear memories, which naturally fade within 10 days. We then examined whether increasing adult neurogenesis could prevent the natural decay of these memories. We investigated the hippocampus's dependence on these memories using context, sound, or smell as the conditioned stimuli. Memantine (MEM), andrographolide (ANDRO), and an enriched environment (EE) were used to investigate their effects on neurogenesis and memory retention.

resultsEE and ANDRO increased neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus (DG). Interestingly, neither treatment altered the progenitor cell population in the DG of Nestin-GFP mice. To gain further insight into the effects of ANDRO and MEM, we recorded the oscillations in DG local field potentials (LFP) immediately and 7 days after the pharmacological treatments. Acute administration of MEM increased slow gamma power in DG, while ANDRO had the opposite effect. Finally, we tested whether treatments would extend the fear conditioning memory. ANDRO and EE increased fear memory, but only for contextual fear conditioning (CFC).

conclusionsOur study shows that different methods allegedly used to increase adult neurogenesis have varying effects on DG neurophysiology. Moreover, it suggests that memories reliant on the hippocampus, such as CFC, may be more prone to alterations in adult neurogenesis than memories less dependent on this brain region, such as auditory and olfactory conditioned fear memories.

Indexed as

DiterpenesFearHippocampusMemoryNeurogenesisAnimalsDentate GyrusMaleMemantineMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, TransgenicandrographolideDiterpenesMemantineAdult neurogenesisAuditory fear conditioningContextual fear conditioningFear memoryHippocampusOlfactory fear conditioning

Identifiers

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.