Skip to main content

Post 4- Excitability and CREB in the competitive encoding of fear memory


The papers this week begin with Han et al., 2009 that described experiments showing the selective erasure of fear memory, with the overarching results depicting how specific neuronal populations exist that selectively code for fear memory within a memory trace. They tested this by pinpointing which neurons under specific conditions were active upon fear memory recall and ablated them to show the disappearance of fear memory recall. The experiments were carried out well with quite robust results, however the most significant part of the paper was their ability to identify the subpopulation of neurons that encoded the fear memory in response to training. It was the discovery of neurons expressing increased levels of CREB that were more likely to encode enhanced fear memory that lead Yiu et al. 2014 to work on finding out the mechanism that allowed for these CREB expressing neurons to selectively encode fear memories. 

Their findings were centered not in the attribution of these neurons in the Lateral Amygdala to CREB expression, but to the high excitability levels of these neurons before and during fear training that allowed them to competitively code and retrieve the fear memory. This hypothesis and experimentation was intriguing as this idea of more excitable neurons “winning” falls in parallel with the Hebbian ideas of “Neurons that fire together wire together.” Results gathered by Yiu et al. 2014, greatly aid in the possible understanding of this mechanism. It is comparable to the idea of synaptic pruning as well, where the increased excitability of neurons are more likely to persist their connections as compared to neurons that are not activated as often.

Han et al. 2009, were able to test this out initially by manipulating CREB levels in Lateral Amygdala neurons and attempting to observe behavior and memory encoding upon overexpression.  This in particular was the key that Yiu et al. 2014 needed to come across their hypothesis that excitability of neurons was what made them more likely to be part of the memory trace. Yiu et al. 2014, used this method as well as expression of a dominant negative KCNQ2 mutant, synthetic receptor activation and finally optogenetics to show that the ability of this specific population of neurons to competitively encode memory was not due to expression of CREB alone, but due to the increased excitability of the neuron, before or during training, that gave it a higher chance of being part of the memory trace. 

The succession of research following Han et al. 2009 is what excites me most about science, as it is the constant building of knowledge and improving upon previous work that allows scientists to follow new paths and lead to novel discoveries. Yiu et al. 2014, uncovered a mechanism that using previous research that will have undoubtedly inspired research after their own.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Gut-Brain Axis

The papers for this week aimed to investigate the role of the gut-brain axis in stress and neurodevelopmental disorders. While we know that our microbiome influences brain function and certainly has some down-stream effects on behavior, the exact mechanisms by which this happens are complex and still not fully understood.  Reber et al. demonstrated that immunization with an immunoregulatory environmental microorganism ( M. vaccae ) can rescue a stress phenotype induced with subordinate colony housing. I found the data in this paper very compelling, and the data clearly shows that immunized mice exhibit many more “proactive” behaviors than non-immunized mice, but I did wonder if there was a way to get a more complete picture of dominance status. Here, they compared the number of proactive behaviors (attacks, chasing) to reactive behaviors (flight, avoiding), to determine the dominance score of every animal. However, they only did this with male mice with other male aggressors, ...

Gut-brain axis

This weeks papers Reber et al. 2016 and Buffington et al. 2016 present a super interesting look into the gut-brain axis. Regarding both of these papers, it was amazing to see how potent favorable or unfavorable gut microbiome compositions are in affecting neuronal signaling and overall behavior. Reber et al. shows how immunoregulatory immunization with specifically heat killed M.vaccae can serve as a protective factor against chronic subordinate stress induce colotis as well as behavioral symptoms due to chronic stress as such. Interestringly, this paper depleted regulatory T cell activity via the anti CD25 antibody in order to show that the antiinflammatory mechanism induced by m vaccae immunization is depented on the secondary regulatory mechanisms offered by Treg proliferation and signaling. But, when T reg signaling was removed, this did not seem to cause a significant change in behavior . Therefore, this begs the consideration of what othe rmechanisms may be at play in order ...

Gut-Brain Interactions: Buffington et al. (2016) and Reber et al. (2016)

Buffington et al. (2016) and Reber et al. (2016) present quite fascinating approaches to studying the interactions or ‘axis’ between the rodent (and human) gut and brain. As the gut is a primary route for bringing things from the environment into our body, these two studies present very clear and convincing evidence for the relevance and translatable validity of their various hypotheses.   One of the most interesting conclusions to me from Buffington et al. was that co-housing three high-fat diet offspring with just one regular-diet offspring was enough to rescue their social behavior deficits and microbiome profiles. This is remarkable, and I would like to hear more about possible mechanisms for this transfer to actually occur. Although the article mentions that mice do eat each other’s feces to transfer microbiota, could there be a certain “threshold” or level of bacteria needed to observe this phenotype switch? That is, how many more high-fat diet mice could have been house...