Literature DB >> 16928858

Trace conditioning and the hippocampus: the importance of contiguity.

Debra A Bangasser1, David E Waxler, Jessica Santollo, Tracey J Shors.   

Abstract

Trace conditioning, a form of classical conditioning in which the presentation of the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the unconditioned stimulus (US) is separated in time by an interstimulus interval, requires an intact hippocampus. In contrast, classical conditioning procedures in which the CS and US are not separated by an interstimulus interval (i.e., delay conditioning procedures) typically do not (Solomon et al., 1986). However, why trace conditioning is dependent on the hippocampus is unknown. Several theories suggest that it is specifically the discontiguity between the CS and US in trace conditioning that critically engages the hippocampus. However, there are other explanations that do not depend on discontiguity. To determine whether the lack of contiguity renders trace conditioning hippocampal dependent, we designed a "contiguous trace conditioning" (CTC) paradigm in which CS-US contiguity is restored by re-presenting the CS simultaneously with the US. Although rats with excitotoxic lesions of the hippocampus could not learn a standard trace fear-conditioning paradigm, lesioned rats trained on CTC showed significant conditioning, at levels similar to those with sham surgeries. Importantly, lesioned rats trained solely with simultaneous CS-US presentations did not demonstrate conditioning. Together, these data suggest that rats with hippocampal lesions can form a memory of a trace CS-US association when contiguity is restored. Therefore, the dependence of traditional trace paradigms on the hippocampus can be attributed to the absence of temporal contiguity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16928858      PMCID: PMC3289537          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1742-06.2006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  21 in total

Review 1.  Memory traces of trace memories: neurogenesis, synaptogenesis and awareness.

Authors:  Tracey J Shors
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 13.837

2.  Differential contribution of amygdala and hippocampus to cued and contextual fear conditioning.

Authors:  R G Phillips; J E LeDoux
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 1.912

3.  Pavlovian conditioning. It's not what you think it is.

Authors:  R A Rescorla
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1988-03

4.  Sequence of single neuron changes in CA1 hippocampus of rabbits during acquisition of trace eyeblink conditioned responses.

Authors:  M D McEchron; J F Disterhoft
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Modality-specific retrograde amnesia of fear.

Authors:  J J Kim; M S Fanselow
Journal:  Science       Date:  1992-05-01       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Bridging temporal gaps between CS and US in autoshaping: insertion of other stimuli before, during, and after CS.

Authors:  P S Kaplan; E Hearst
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1982-04

7.  Neuron activity related to short-term memory.

Authors:  J M Fuster; G E Alexander
Journal:  Science       Date:  1971-08-13       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Hippocampal lesions and trace conditioning in the rabbit.

Authors:  G O James; M J Hardiman; C H Yeo
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Hippocampus and trace conditioning of the rabbit's classically conditioned nictitating membrane response.

Authors:  P R Solomon; E R Vander Schaaf; R F Thompson; D J Weisz
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 1.912

10.  Eyeblink classical conditioning in H.M.: delay and trace paradigms.

Authors:  D S Woodruff-Pak
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 1.912

View more
  64 in total

1.  Differential acetylcholine release in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus during pavlovian trace and delay conditioning.

Authors:  M Melissa Flesher; Allen E Butt; Brandee L Kinney-Hurd
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 2.877

2.  Muscarinic receptor activation enables persistent firing in pyramidal neurons from superficial layers of dorsal perirhinal cortex.

Authors:  Vicky L Navaroli; Yanjun Zhao; Pawel Boguszewski; Thomas H Brown
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 3.899

3.  Differences in hippocampal CREB phosphorylation in trace fear conditioning of two inbred mouse strains.

Authors:  Yoo Kyeong Hwang; Jae-Chun Song; Seol-Heui Han; Jeiwon Cho; Dani R Smith; Michela Gallagher; Jung-Soo Han
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 3.252

Review 4.  The impact of hippocampal lesions on trace-eyeblink conditioning and forebrain-cerebellar interactions.

Authors:  Craig Weiss; John F Disterhoft
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.912

5.  Temporal discontiguity is neither necessary nor sufficient for learning-induced effects on adult neurogenesis.

Authors:  Benedetta Leuner; Jaylyn Waddell; Elizabeth Gould; Tracey J Shors
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-12-27       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Neurogenesis and learning: acquisition and asymptotic performance predict how many new cells survive in the hippocampus.

Authors:  Christina Dalla; Debra A Bangasser; Carol Edgecomb; Tracey J Shors
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2007-04-06       Impact factor: 2.877

Review 7.  Learning to learn - intrinsic plasticity as a metaplasticity mechanism for memory formation.

Authors:  Megha Sehgal; Chenghui Song; Vanessa L Ehlers; James R Moyer
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 2.877

8.  Hippocampus, time, and memory--a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Warren H Meck; Russell M Church; Matthew S Matell
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.912

9.  Hippocampal hyperexcitability underlies enhanced fear memories in TgNTRK3, a panic disorder mouse model.

Authors:  Mónica Santos; Davide D'Amico; Ornella Spadoni; Alejandro Amador-Arjona; Oliver Stork; Mara Dierssen
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Genetic background differences and nonassociative effects in mouse trace fear conditioning.

Authors:  Dani R Smith; Michela Gallagher; Mark E Stanton
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2007-09-05       Impact factor: 2.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.