RATIONALE: The role of glutamatergic system in learning and memory has been extensively studied, and especially N-methyl-D: -aspartate (NMDA) receptors have been implicated in different learning and memory processes. Less is known, however, about group I metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors in this field. Recent studies indicated that the coactivation of both NMDA and group I mGlu receptors is required for the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) and learning. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to evaluate if there is a functional interaction between NMDA and group I mGlu receptors in two different models of aversive learning. METHODS: Effects of NMDA, mGlu1, and mGlu5 receptor antagonists on acquisition were tested after systemic coadministration of selected ineffective doses in passive avoidance (PA) and fear-potentiated startle (FPS). RESULTS: Interaction in aversive learning was investigated using selective antagonists: (3-ethyl-2-methyl-quinolin-6-yl)-(4-methoxy-cyclohexyl)-methanone methanesulfonate (EMQMCM) for mGlu1, [(2-methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl]pyridine (MTEP) for mGlu5, and (+)-5-methyl-10,11-dihydro-5H-dibenzocyclohepten-5,10-imine maleate [(+)MK-801] for NMDA receptors. In PA, the coapplication of MTEP at a dose of 5 mg/kg and (+)MK-801 at a dose of 0.1 mg/kg 30 min before training impaired the acquisition tested 24 h later. Similarly, EMQMCM (2.5 mg/kg) plus (+)MK-801 (0.1 mg/kg), given during the acquisition phase, blocked the acquisition of the PA response. In contrast, neither the combination of MTEP (1.25 mg/kg) nor EMQMCM (5 mg/kg) plus (+)MK-801 (0.05 mg/kg) was effective on the acquisition assessed in the FPS paradigm. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest differences in the interaction of the NMDA and mGlu group I receptor types in aversive instrumental conditioning vs conditioning to a discrete light cue.
RATIONALE: The role of glutamatergic system in learning and memory has been extensively studied, and especially N-methyl-D: -aspartate (NMDA) receptors have been implicated in different learning and memory processes. Less is known, however, about group I metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors in this field. Recent studies indicated that the coactivation of both NMDA and group I mGlu receptors is required for the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) and learning. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study is to evaluate if there is a functional interaction between NMDA and group I mGlu receptors in two different models of aversive learning. METHODS: Effects of NMDA, mGlu1, and mGlu5 receptor antagonists on acquisition were tested after systemic coadministration of selected ineffective doses in passive avoidance (PA) and fear-potentiated startle (FPS). RESULTS: Interaction in aversive learning was investigated using selective antagonists: (3-ethyl-2-methyl-quinolin-6-yl)-(4-methoxy-cyclohexyl)-methanone methanesulfonate (EMQMCM) for mGlu1, [(2-methyl-1,3-thiazol-4-yl)ethynyl]pyridine (MTEP) for mGlu5, and (+)-5-methyl-10,11-dihydro-5H-dibenzocyclohepten-5,10-imine maleate [(+)MK-801] for NMDA receptors. In PA, the coapplication of MTEP at a dose of 5 mg/kg and (+)MK-801 at a dose of 0.1 mg/kg 30 min before training impaired the acquisition tested 24 h later. Similarly, EMQMCM (2.5 mg/kg) plus (+)MK-801 (0.1 mg/kg), given during the acquisition phase, blocked the acquisition of the PA response. In contrast, neither the combination of MTEP (1.25 mg/kg) nor EMQMCM (5 mg/kg) plus (+)MK-801 (0.05 mg/kg) was effective on the acquisition assessed in the FPS paradigm. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest differences in the interaction of the NMDA and mGlu group I receptor types in aversive instrumental conditioning vs conditioning to a discrete light cue.
Authors: D M Barros; L A Izquierdo; T Mello e Souza; P G Ardenghi; P Pereira; J H Medina; I Izquierdo Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Natalie C Tronson; Yomayra F Guzman; Anita L Guedea; Kyu Hwan Huh; Can Gao; Martin K Schwarz; Jelena Radulovic Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Robert W Gould; Russell J Amato; Michael Bubser; Max E Joffe; Michael T Nedelcovych; Analisa D Thompson; Hilary H Nickols; Johannes P Yuh; Xiaoyan Zhan; Andrew S Felts; Alice L Rodriguez; Ryan D Morrison; Frank W Byers; Jerri M Rook; John S Daniels; Colleen M Niswender; P Jeffrey Conn; Kyle A Emmitte; Craig W Lindsley; Carrie K Jones Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Sophie E Holmes; Matthew J Girgenti; Margaret T Davis; Robert H Pietrzak; Nicole DellaGioia; Nabeel Nabulsi; David Matuskey; Steven Southwick; Ronald S Duman; Richard E Carson; John H Krystal; Irina Esterlis Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: S W Fowler; A K Ramsey; J M Walker; P Serfozo; M F Olive; T R Schachtman; A Simonyi Journal: Neurobiol Learn Mem Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 2.877