Skip to main content

Post 4: CREB and fear memory extinction/enhancement

Upon reading and rereading Han et al. (2009), I found myself left with many questions. I wondered why LA neurons with increased CREB are preferentially activated by fear memories/recruited for memory traces, whether CREB has the same effect in other brain regions, and whether its effects are limited to auditory fear memories, to name a few. Upon reading Yiu et al. (2014), many of my uncertainties stemming from Han et al. were clarified, but again I was left with questions regarding methods and implications of this study for future research. 

While Yui was very comprehensive in its methods of investigation, experimental groups, and controls, I wondered why there was not a greater reliance on temporally precise methods of neuronal activation/excitement such as hM3Dq DREADD and especially optogenetics. It seems that the relatively large window of the transgene expression using HSV could lead to enhanced encoding of memories outside of the fear training and/or testing, and an expansion of their more precise methods could have generated even more accurate results. Additionally, there seemed to be a focus on the activation of small portionsof LA neurons for increased fear memories, but there was no investigation or mention of what happens when larger proportions of LA neurons are activated. Because it was found that the same small number of neurons was involved in memory traces in these investigations, I would hypothesize that a larger number of activated LA neurons would lead to a memory trace of the same size that is potentially weaker due to increased competition between cells overexpressing CREB. 

On a broader level, I considered the implications of this research and how its findings may be applied in future research or therapeutic methods. One of my most pressing questions while reading both of these papers was whether CREB overexpression enhances memory traces in other brain regions and/or for types of memories other than auditory fear memories that may be more complex. While Yui did confirm that there is no memory enhancement with CREB overexpression in the lateral or central amygdala, I wonder if this is due to the fact that only auditory fear memories were investigated, and I would be interested in an investigation of whether CREB activity in brain regions outside the amygdala are involved in non-fear memory traces. As for the types of memories influenced by CREB overexpression, it is essential for potential clinical applications of these findings to know whether CREB overexpression may be involved in the enhancement of more complex fear memories, as seen in PTSD. If so, these LA neurons could be a future target for treatment of PTSD in humans, offering a way to extinguish specific fear memories without damaging more than a small number of neurons. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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 ...

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

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...

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

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...