Ryo Sawagashira1,2, Masaki Tanaka3. 1. Department of Physiology, Hokkaido University School of Medicine, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan. rsawa6133@med.hokudai.ac.jp. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Hokkaido University School of Medicine, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan. rsawa6133@med.hokudai.ac.jp. 3. Department of Physiology, Hokkaido University School of Medicine, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan. masaki@med.hokudai.ac.jp.
Abstract
RATIONALE: The central cholinergic system is a major therapeutic target for restoring cognitive functions. Although manipulation of cholinergic signaling is known to alter working memory (WM), the underlying mechanism remains unclear. It is widely accepted that WM consists of multiple functional modules, one storing short-term memory and the other manipulating and utilizing it. A recently developed visual search task and a relevant model can be used to assess multiple components of WM during administration of acetylcholine receptor (AChR)-related substances. OBJECTIVES: The effects of systemic administration of AChR-related agents on WM and eye movements were examined during the oculomotor foraging task. METHODS: Three monkeys performing the task received an intramuscular injection of saline or the following AChR-related agents: nicotine (24 or 56 μg/kg), mecamylamine (nicotinic AChR antagonist, 1.0 mg/kg), oxotremorine (muscarinic AChR agonist, 3.0 µg/kg), and scopolamine (muscarinic AChR antagonist, 20 μg/kg). The task was to find a target among 15 identical objects by making eye movements within 6 s. The data were analyzed according to the foraging model that incorporated three parameters. RESULTS: Nicotine and mecamylamine significantly increased the utility but not the capacity of short-term memory, while muscarinic AChR-related agents did not alter any WM parameters. Further regression analyses with a mixed-effect model showed that the beneficial effect of nicotine on memory utility remained after considering eye movement variability, but the beneficial effect of mecamylamine disappeared. CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine improves visual search, mainly by increasing the utility of short-term memory, with minimal changes in oculomotor parameters.
RATIONALE: The central cholinergic system is a major therapeutic target for restoring cognitive functions. Although manipulation of cholinergic signaling is known to alter working memory (WM), the underlying mechanism remains unclear. It is widely accepted that WM consists of multiple functional modules, one storing short-term memory and the other manipulating and utilizing it. A recently developed visual search task and a relevant model can be used to assess multiple components of WM during administration of acetylcholine receptor (AChR)-related substances. OBJECTIVES: The effects of systemic administration of AChR-related agents on WM and eye movements were examined during the oculomotor foraging task. METHODS: Three monkeys performing the task received an intramuscular injection of saline or the following AChR-related agents: nicotine (24 or 56 μg/kg), mecamylamine (nicotinic AChR antagonist, 1.0 mg/kg), oxotremorine (muscarinic AChR agonist, 3.0 µg/kg), and scopolamine (muscarinic AChR antagonist, 20 μg/kg). The task was to find a target among 15 identical objects by making eye movements within 6 s. The data were analyzed according to the foraging model that incorporated three parameters. RESULTS: Nicotine and mecamylamine significantly increased the utility but not the capacity of short-term memory, while muscarinic AChR-related agents did not alter any WM parameters. Further regression analyses with a mixed-effect model showed that the beneficial effect of nicotine on memory utility remained after considering eye movement variability, but the beneficial effect of mecamylamine disappeared. CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine improves visual search, mainly by increasing the utility of short-term memory, with minimal changes in oculomotor parameters.
Authors: Stacy A Castner; Gennady N Smagin; Timothy M Piser; Yi Wang; Jeffrey S Smith; Edward P Christian; Ladislav Mrzljak; Graham V Williams Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 13.382