Skip to main content

Week 4 - Memory Engrams

By
Both papers this week examine the memory trace originating in the amygdala during fear conditioning. Han et al examined the memory trace and how to eradicate it. Essentially, the researchers found that neurons in the Lateral Amygdala (LA) express CREB to create a fear memory, or the hypothesized memory trace. When those specific cells where selectively killed through dipheria toxin (DT), the mice appeared to forget all fear conditioning for a sustained period of time. The group used controls of mice that were injected with the toxin and had apoptosis, but not on the specific CREB expressing neurons, and the mice still retained fear memory showing the CREB neurons were the ones with the memory trace. Yiu et al furthers Han’s lab research by examining what predisposes a neuron to participant in the memory trace. They find that neuronal excitability immediately before the memory formation is the ultimate factor in determining which neurons express CREB (and are therefore part of the memory trace). 

For Han, while I think the group did many tests and chose a fitting control group to prove the efficacy of their hypothesis and results, I wish they had explored more of the hippocampus’s role. I understand that due to funding and lab limitations, that just may not have been an option, but if memory is a topic, the hippocampus is usually discussed. The lateral amygdala makes sense to study because it is fear conditioning and has functional connections with the hippocampus, but it cannot be the epitome of the whole memory trace. It evidentially plays a very critical role in fear memories as shown through this experiment, but I wonder if the CREB expressing neurons in the LA called on neurons in the hippocampus for the contextual memory itself? Yiu et al briefly looks at the hippocampus, but just in terms of neuron excitability, not its specific functional role in the memory trace. I would be interested in the hippocampus’s role in the memory trace beyond fear conditioning and more in the context of episodic details. To test this, researchers could set up another experiment like last week’s paper and put the mice in different settings, fear condition them, any see if you could specifically ablate cells in the hippocampus and/or amygdala and what effect that has. Additionally, I would be curious to see other forms of fear conditioning besides the auditory fear conditioning used, just to ensure any experimental results are not specific to auditory conditioning.       

Lastly, as Yiu et al’s group touches on in terms of artificially activating the CREB neurons as a cue to retrieve the memory, I think it would be interesting to see how many of these CREB neurons are required to keep the memory trace intact/recall it. For some individuals with ischemic damage to their hippocampal neurons, they are able to retain certain memories as long as the whole hippocampus is not destroyed. While the amygdala is very different, I wonder if it could be the same – if only parts of the neurons are required to recall the memory. For example, if only half of the CREB activated neurons are destroyed, could the fear response still be retained?      

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

Gut-brain axis

By
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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ramirez et al.: 2013 and 2015 Papers

By
In these papers, Ramirez et al. strive to understand how memory encoding via optogenetic manipulation of engram-bearing cells in the hippocampus, specifically the dentate gyrus, can affect an animal’s response to a stressful context.  The first paper, published in 2013, was crucial to the field as it introduced this very exciting technique; in this paper, Ramirez et al. use tet-tag to manipulate brain circuity and establish associations between two contexts. Throughout the paper, this is referred to as “false memories.” Using these artificial memories, the investigators are able to manipulate the animal’s fear response in a specific context. Specifically, after the animals are conditioned to a repeated fearful stimulus (a foot shock, in context B), activation of the involved DG cells in a different context (context A’) will also initiate a fear response (in absence of any foot shock). In this experiment, the false memory is used to create an unnatural fear association in a given...
Post a Comment
Read more