Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42277042›Full record

ArticleNature communications2026

Threat intensity shapes cortical engram architecture supporting remote memory retrieval.

Miodrag M Mitrić, Sanne Beerens, Panthea Nemat, Esther Visser, Luca Lorraine van Leeuwen, Rolinka J van der Loo, August B Smit, Priyanka Rao-Ruiz, Michel C van den Oever

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2026. 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

9 authors.

Miodrag M Mitrić *Department of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4137-3375
Sanne Beerens *Department of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Panthea NematDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-8680-4756
Esther VisserDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7799-1784
Luca Lorraine van LeeuwenDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rolinka J van der LooDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
August B SmitDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2286-1587
Priyanka Rao-RuizDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. p.rao@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9504-1427
Michel C van den OeverDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Neurobiology, Center for Neurogenomics and Cognitive Research, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. michel.vanden.oever@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5523-8612

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 016.168.313Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 024.004.012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The strength of persistent threat memories depends on the intensity of an aversive experience. We combined engram tagging with chemogenetics, electrophysiology and spine analyses in male mice to identify how threat intensity, following mild or strong contextual threat conditioning (CTC), shapes physiological and structural properties of prelimbic cortex (PL) pyramidal neurons. PL engram cells selectively mediate retrieval of a mild remote threat memory, and develop neuroadaptations that are time-dependent, dendritic segment-specific, and modulated by threat intensity. Specifically, increased presynaptic release probability, together with reduced postsynaptic strength and spine size, developed regardless of threat intensity. However, addition of long thin spines occurred exclusively on oblique dendrites of engram neurons after mild CTC, aligning with the PL engram contribution to mild, but not strong, threat memory. Our findings reveal how threat intensity shapes cortical engram architecture, which is pivotal for understanding the neural representation of threat memory strength and persistence.

Indexed as

FearMemory, Long-TermPrefrontal CortexPyramidal CellsAnimalsChemogeneticsConditioning, ClassicalDendritesDendritic SpinesMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BL

Identifiers

PMID42277042
PMCPMC13408494

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.