| Literature DB >> 24319409 |
Abstract
The interactions between distinct pharmacological systems are proposed as a key dynamic in the formation of unconscious memories underlying rumination and mood disorder, but also reflect the plastic capacity of neural networks that can aid recovery. An inverse and reciprocal relationship is postulated between cholinergic and monoaminergic receptor subtypes. M1-type muscarinic receptor transduction facilitates encoding of unconscious, prepotent behavioral repertoires at the core of affective disorders and ADHD. Behavioral adaptation to new contingencies is mediated by the classic prototype receptor: 5-HT1A (Gi/o) and its modulation of M1-plasticity. Reversal of learning is dependent on increased phasic activation of midbrain monoaminergic nuclei and is a function of hippocampal theta. Acquired hippocampal dysfunction due to abnormal activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis predicts deficits in hippocampal-dependent memory and executive function and further impairments to cognitive inhibition. Encoding of explicit memories is mediated by Gq/11 and Gs signaling of monoamines only. A role is proposed for the phasic activation of the basal forebrain cholinergic nucleus by cortical projections from the complex consisting of the insula and claustrum. Although controversial, recent studies suggest a common ontogenetic origin of the two structures and a functional coupling. Lesions of the region result in loss of motivational behavior and familiarity based judgements. A major hypothesis of the paper is that these lost faculties result indirectly, from reduced cholinergic tone.Entities:
Keywords: hippocampus; memory; muscarinic receptor; serotonin
Year: 2013 PMID: 24319409 PMCID: PMC3837351 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00220
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
Figure 1Illustration of the topographical localization of the 15 distinct architectonic areas of the insular cortex in one set of drawing of 11 coronal sections from the right hemisphere from one representative case cm6R. (A) Drawing of the 15 architectonic areas and borders. The granular dysgranular and agranular areas are distinguished by darker, intermediate and light gray tones, respectively. Scale bar = 2.5 mm. (B) Low magnification and simplified drawing of the entire coronal section from which the drawings in panel (C) were made. The extent of insular cortex shown in panel (C) is represented by the darkened areas. The anteroposterior position of the section is indicated on the right or left of the section using the limen insulae as the zero. (C) Approximate anteroposterior position of the coronal section juxtaposed on a lateral view photograph of a different brain in which the insula was exposed by dissection.(D) Higher magnification of the same lateral view showing the anterior vertical ridge of the insula (arrow).
Figure 2Shaded area represents the calustrum as defined by parvalbumin immunoraectivity. The surrounding and embedded dots are immunoreactive deep layer VI cells of the insula cortex. Permission to reprint from Oxford University Press, (Mathur et al., 2009), this figure is not included under Frontiers' CC-BY license policy.
Figure 3Activation of monoaminergic nuclei by the hippocampus and globus pallidus. Blue arrows represent transmission pathway of hippocampal theta to serotonergic raphe. Orange arrows input and output of the lateral habenula. CPu, caudate putamen; DR, MR dorsal and median raphe; GABA, gamma-aminobutyric acid; Glu, glutamate; GPe, GPe, globus· pallidus external and internal segments; IPN, interpeduncular nucleus; LHb, MHb, lateral and medial habenula; SM, stria medullaris; SNc, substantia nigra pars compacta; VTA, ventral tegmental area.