Skip to main content

Memory and the BLA

By

In “Selective Erasure of Fear Memory”, Han et al. observed that neurons in the lateral amygdala with relatively increased levels of the transcription factor CREB are known to be preferentially activated by auditory fear memory. The literature demonstrates the idea that overexpression of CREB using HSV and then a subsequent ablation of these neurons in iDTR transgenic mice causes selective memory erasure. Memory was behaviorally assessed pre and post induction of cell death in tagged LA neurons, and increasing CREB in a subpopulation of LA neurons enhances a weak memory and specifically ablating these neurons reverses this enhancement. Furthermore, if neurons overexpressing CREB are deleted, the result is long-lasting memory loss in CREB-cre mice and there is no evidence of memory recovery.

Yiu et al. conducts a robust series of experiments in a later publication elucidating that memory allocation is partially based on relative neuronal excitability of LA pyramidal/principal neuronal subpopulations at the time of conditioning or training. Although Yiu et al. is most robust in their methodologies, Han et al. really laid down the groundwork for exploring LA neurons with increased CREB in memory tracing.

Han et al. disclosed that although CREB plays an imperative role, increasing it in a subpopulation of LA neurons does not further enhance a strong memory. Moreover, Yiu et al. also discusses how the memory-enhancing effect of CREB is prevented by the decreasing excitability in the LA pyramidal/principal neurons. This stood out to me and I would be curious to see if manipulation or overexpression of any subpopulation of neurons in the LA could potentially have memory confabulation. We know the amygdala is heavily implicated in valence association, so I would be curious to see whether manipulation of the LA neurons could tag a negative memory as a positive one and vice versa. This idea was slightly presented in Steve Ramirez’s work on the DG, but the amygdala is so much more involved in emotional processing than the hippocampus so I’m wondering if this would generate more robust data. I’m both curious and excited to see how down the road, once research is more solid, how we apply this data clinically, and whether the engram will be deciphered in my lifetime.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gut-Brain Interactions: Buffington et al, Reber et al 2016

By
April 13 Papers (Buffington et. al, Reber et. al) I found this week’s papers to be quite novel in that they both proposed potential treatments for neurodevelopmental or psychiatric disorders that target bacterial or microbial abnormalities and how these give rise to certain behavioral and physical symptoms associated with the disorders. I thought this was a very unusual yet interesting approach, and as I have not previously studied the gut-brain axis, these papers offered me a fresh perspective on researching psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. They were also unconventional in their focus of the physical symptoms that often accompany mental disorders, as this is not something that I have seen many other papers touch upon very much. Particularly, I was surprised by the Reber et al paper’s focus on the link between psychiatric disorders and inflammation in organs other than the brain, such as the colon, and the Buffington et al paper’s description of a relationship between ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al. and Reber et al.: Gut-Brain Interactions

By
While I have not encountered a lot of gut-brain interaction literature yet. I found each paper unique and fascinating. Reber et al felt inaccessible for me. I felt like I didn’t understand what the goal of the paper really was and why they did the tests that they did. It seems like most of their relevant information got shoved into numerous supplementary figures and their behavior was quite difficult to follow. Multiple sections of their paper were supported with data found entirely in supplementary figures, which makes it difficult to follow the same conclusions. I have a few issues with the behavior they chose and because of this, I struggle to find driving conclusions from their work. I don’t understand why the CSC was not only the prior stressor but was also the acute stress condition both groups faced. To me, I feel like it would have made more sense to have the CSC be the prior stressor and then judge the effect on social behavior with maybe a three choice chamber test or te...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al (2016) and Reber et al. (2016)

By
This week's articles were about the role of the gut-brain axis in neurodevelopment and stress. Reber and colleagues used a heat-killed version of the bacteria, M. vaccae, as a type of vaccine and found that administration to mouse models resulted in decreased response to chronic stress, prevented colitis related to stress, and reduced measures of anxiety. Reber et al. also used the inactivated M. vaccae in a mouse model of IBD and found that the bacteria prevented stress-induce flare-ups of colitis, but that this could be reversed by removing T cells. Buffington and colleagues instead examined the role of gut microbiota in maternal high-fat diets (MHFD) in the neurodevelopment and social behaviors of their offspring. Buffington et al. found that housing MHFD rats with the offspring of regular diet (MRD) rats prevented social deficits in their offspring. They also found that this co-housing arrangement prevented an imbalance in the gut bacteria Reber and colleagues' findings w...
Post a Comment
Read more