Skip to main content

Week 4 Memory Engrams

By
            After reading both research papers, it is unclear to me what the clinical significance is. I understand that the 10% of LA neurons that had more excitability before fear training were significantly more likely to be allocated into the memory trace and enhance memory formation. However, in all cases, the excitability of the neurons was artificial, whether it be due to optogenetics or a CNO injection. In the discussion of the second paper, it was said that endogenous changes in intrinsic excitability are linked to learning. There was one sentence that alluded to what is possibly happening naturally. Do we endogenously express varying levels of CREB in our LA neurons, and whichever ones are randomly excited at the moment right before an experience get allocated into the memory trace? What are the endogenous changes in excitability and how does this paper relate to them? It was also determined that expressing Kir2.1, which decreases excitability, did not affect memory formation. So, animals without this increase in excitability performed similar to the control. Doesn’t this show that we don’t need excitable neurons to form normal fear memories?
            In the first paper, a fear memory was erased via apoptosis. In an ideal world, this would be extremely relevant if we could, for example, erase the fear memory of a trauma. I’d be curious about the overlap if researchers increased CREB with one technique, fear conditioned with one tone, and then increased CREB via another technique to fear condition with another tone. Since only about 10% of LA neurons are recruited for one fear memory trace, there must be some overlap with fear memories, given how many people have. If this is the case, there would be no way to erase one fear memory without disrupting several others. So again, I do not see the clinical significance. We seemingly cannot decrease fear and I can’t imagine a scenario where we would want an increased fear memory as opposed to a normal fear memory.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 2- Dopamine Modulation of Depressive-like Behaviors

By
The Chaudhury et al paper explored the neural circuit mechanisms involved in the dopamine modulation of certain symptoms of depression. In this study, the researchers looked at social interaction and sucrose preference as part of their social-defeat paradigm, which has been shown in the past to be indicative of depressive-like behaviors. Although I initially did not completely see the connection between the social-defeat stress model of depression and the tonic vs phasic firing of dopamine neurons, it seemed that susceptibility and resilience to stress played a role in the functional/behavioral effects of dopamine firing. It was interesting to see how chronic mild stress with phasic firing of VTA dopamine neurons converted even resilient mice into susceptible mice.  The Tye et al paper similarly looked at the dopamine modulation of depressive-like behaviors, focusing on motivation with the forced swim tests and open field tests, followed by measurement of anhedonia by quantifyi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sial & Allsop

By
Sial et al. derived a novel approach for studying what they deem vicarious defeat stress (VSDS) as a model for MDD, PTSD, and other mood-related disorders as an alternative to the classical CSDS paradigm. Using adult male mice, they demonstrate that their model induces a robust and measurable social avoidant phenotype as well as other stress and anxiety related behavioral outputs. Their subsequent rescue study with chronic fluoxetine treatment shows reversal of the behavioral phenotypes and emphasizes the predictive validity of the model. Allsop et al. found that BLA-projecting ACC neurons preferentially encode socially derived aversive cue information by encoding the demonstrator’s distress response during observational learning, hence enabling acquisition of negative valence of cue by BLA neurons and behavioral output. In order to test their hypothesis, Allsop et al. used an observational fear conditional paradigm to create association between a conditioned stimulu...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington and Reber

By
Buffington et al. explore a mechanism by which maternal obesity can induce neuronal and subsequent behavioral disorders. Using a model of high-fat diet (MHFD)-induced obesity, the authors showcase the strong connection between the brain and the gut, and its impact on behavior. The findings are provocative; by exposing these offspring to the microbiome of control offspring, there was evidence of a rescued observed behavioral phenotype. Furthermore, a phylogenetic profiling of the gut microbiome revealed a decrease in L. reuteri within MHFD offspring, and introduction of live L. reuteri into the drinking water shows successful rescue of the behavioral issues in the MHFD offspring. L. reuteri-induced expression of oxytocin within the paraventricular nuclei of the hypothalamus provides a potential mechanistic explanation for the behavioral changes. I thought this paper provided robust support for the hypothesized interaction between the gut biome and the developing CNS, with tremendous po...
Post a Comment
Read more