Patricio T Huerta, Linus D Sun, Matthew A Wilson, Susumu Tonegawa 

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Amygdala and Fear Conditioning: Has the Nut Been Cracked?
Advertisements

Volume 54, Issue 6, Pages (June 2007)
Takafumi Minamimoto, Richard C. Saunders, Barry J. Richmond  Neuron 
Volume 60, Issue 4, Pages (November 2008)
Volume 75, Issue 1, Pages (July 2012)
Mark E.J. Sheffield, Michael D. Adoff, Daniel A. Dombeck  Neuron 
Spatial Memory Engram in the Mouse Retrosplenial Cortex
Volume 86, Issue 3, Pages (May 2015)
A Source for Feature-Based Attention in the Prefrontal Cortex
Signal, Noise, and Variation in Neural and Sensory-Motor Latency
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages (January 2017)
Soumya Chatterjee, Edward M. Callaway  Neuron 
Volume 27, Issue 2, Pages (January 2017)
Volume 87, Issue 6, Pages (September 2015)
Volume 67, Issue 6, Pages (September 2010)
Michael L. Morgan, Gregory C. DeAngelis, Dora E. Angelaki  Neuron 
Trajectory Encoding in the Hippocampus and Entorhinal Cortex
Developmental Inhibition of Gsk3 Rescues Behavioral and Neurophysiological Deficits in a Mouse Model of Schizophrenia Predisposition  Makoto Tamura, Jun.
Vincent B. McGinty, Antonio Rangel, William T. Newsome  Neuron 
Feature- and Order-Based Timing Representations in the Frontal Cortex
Single Units in the Medial Prefrontal Cortex with Anxiety-Related Firing Patterns Are Preferentially Influenced by Ventral Hippocampal Activity  Avishek.
CA3 Retrieves Coherent Representations from Degraded Input: Direct Evidence for CA3 Pattern Completion and Dentate Gyrus Pattern Separation  Joshua P.
Volume 27, Issue 19, Pages e2 (October 2017)
Aryeh Hai Taub, Rita Perets, Eilat Kahana, Rony Paz  Neuron 
Inversely Active Striatal Projection Neurons and Interneurons Selectively Delimit Useful Behavioral Sequences  Nuné Martiros, Alexandra A. Burgess, Ann.
The Generality of Parietal Involvement in Visual Attention
Volume 80, Issue 2, Pages (October 2013)
Torben Ott, Simon Nikolas Jacob, Andreas Nieder  Neuron 
Volume 90, Issue 1, Pages (April 2016)
Differences between Neural Activity in Prefrontal Cortex and Striatum during Learning of Novel Abstract Categories  Evan G. Antzoulatos, Earl K. Miller 
Volume 80, Issue 2, Pages (October 2013)
Franco Pestilli, Marisa Carrasco, David J. Heeger, Justin L. Gardner 
A. Saez, M. Rigotti, S. Ostojic, S. Fusi, C.D. Salzman  Neuron 
Volume 88, Issue 3, Pages (November 2015)
Volume 94, Issue 4, Pages e8 (May 2017)
Caleb E. Strait, Tommy C. Blanchard, Benjamin Y. Hayden  Neuron 
Kevin Wood Bieri, Katelyn N. Bobbitt, Laura Lee Colgin  Neuron 
John T. Arsenault, Koen Nelissen, Bechir Jarraya, Wim Vanduffel  Neuron 
Uma R. Karmarkar, Dean V. Buonomano  Neuron 
Ethan S. Bromberg-Martin, Masayuki Matsumoto, Okihide Hikosaka  Neuron 
Effects of Long-Term Visual Experience on Responses of Distinct Classes of Single Units in Inferior Temporal Cortex  Luke Woloszyn, David L. Sheinberg 
Serial, Covert Shifts of Attention during Visual Search Are Reflected by the Frontal Eye Fields and Correlated with Population Oscillations  Timothy J.
Volume 86, Issue 3, Pages (May 2015)
Xiangying Meng, Joseph P.Y. Kao, Hey-Kyoung Lee, Patrick O. Kanold 
Value-Based Modulations in Human Visual Cortex
Franco Pestilli, Marisa Carrasco, David J. Heeger, Justin L. Gardner 
Contributions of Orbitofrontal and Lateral Prefrontal Cortices to Economic Choice and the Good-to-Action Transformation  Xinying Cai, Camillo Padoa-Schioppa 
Adrián Hernández, Antonio Zainos, Ranulfo Romo  Neuron 
Wael F Asaad, Gregor Rainer, Earl K Miller  Neuron 
Short-Term Memory for Figure-Ground Organization in the Visual Cortex
Prefrontal Neurons Coding Suppression of Specific Saccades
Volume 87, Issue 6, Pages (September 2015)
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages (May 1998)
Traces of Experience in the Lateral Entorhinal Cortex
Encoding of Oscillations by Axonal Bursts in Inferior Olive Neurons
Volume 83, Issue 4, Pages (August 2014)
Gregor Rainer, Earl K Miller  Neuron 
Daniela Vallentin, Andreas Nieder  Current Biology 
Volume 24, Issue 10, Pages (September 2018)
Rapid Spatial Learning Controls Instinctive Defensive Behavior in Mice
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages (April 2003)
The Postsaccadic Unreliability of Gain Fields Renders It Unlikely that the Motor System Can Use Them to Calculate Target Position in Space  Benjamin Y.
Supratim Ray, John H.R. Maunsell  Neuron 
Volume 34, Issue 4, Pages (May 2002)
Volume 87, Issue 7, Pages (December 1996)
Surround Integration Organizes a Spatial Map during Active Sensation
Volume 75, Issue 1, Pages (July 2012)
Speed-Accuracy Tradeoff in Olfaction
George D. Dickinson, Ian Parker  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 37, Issue 3, Pages (February 2003)
Presentation transcript:

Formation of Temporal Memory Requires NMDA Receptors within CA1 Pyramidal Neurons  Patricio T Huerta, Linus D Sun, Matthew A Wilson, Susumu Tonegawa  Neuron  Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 473-480 (February 2000) DOI: 10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5

Figure 1 Calibration of the Tracking Method for Measuring Freezing (A, top) The comparison of visually scored freezing done by blind observers (x axis) to freezing scores generated with the tracking method (y axis). The data were fitted by a linear regression with y = 18 + 0.87x, r = 0.96. (A, bottom) The time course of the context conditioning paradigm (n = 6 mice) used to generate the visual (open circles) and tracked (closed circles) freezing scores. Details of the paradigm are given in the Experimental Procedures. The green bars during conditioning represent US deliveries. (B) Sequence of video frames, at times t1 and t2 (200 ms later), showing a mouse exploring the chamber. The video method calculates the difference (t2 − t1). The leading edge of the mouse is represented by black, whereas the trailing edge is represented by yellow. Neuron 2000 25, 473-480DOI: (10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5)

Figure 2 NR1-CA1-KO Mice Are Slower in the Acquisition of Trace Fear Conditioning (A) Time course of the average percent freezing displayed by mutants (n = 23) and controls (n = 23) during trace conditioning. The gray box, at left, indicates the initial three trials, which are enlarged in (B). (B) Pooled data showing the average percent freezing on the initial phase of acquisition for NR1-CA1-KOs (closed circles) and controls (open circles). Symbols represent mean freezing (± SEM) on a 10 s epoch. CS presentations are indicated by gray bars and US occurrence by green bars. It is clear that mutants show lower freezing during this initial phase. (C) Average percent freezing during the ITIs for mutant (n = 23), control (n = 23), pseudo-conditioned (n = 12), and naive (n = 7) mice. Neuron 2000 25, 473-480DOI: (10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5)

Figure 3 NR1-CA1-KO Mice Do Not Show Enhanced Freezing during the Trace Memory Test (A) Pooled data showing the average percent freezing on the initial three trials of the 24 hr test after trace training for NR1-CA1-KOs (n = 23, closed circles) and controls (n = 23, open circles). The test was given in a novel chamber that differed from the conditioning chamber. Symbols represent mean freezing (± SEM) on a 10 s epoch. CS presentations are indicated by gray bars. For convenience, pooled data for pseudo-conditioned mice (n = 12, green circles), which received pseudo-training 24 hr earlier, are also plotted. (B) Occupancy plots of 12 mutants and 12 controls for the 10 s epoch (105–115 s) indicated by “B1” and “B2” in (A). Plots were created by summing frame captures (200 ms in between frames) per mouse. The center of mass of the first frame was defined as the starting location of the mouse, which was then translated to the center of the plot. The x and y axes represent position (total of 300 pixels, which equals 25 cm). The vertical axis is color coded; 100% is red and equals the maximum possible occupancy for that location. High values indicate greater freezing and low values (and wider areas of occupancy) reflect exploration. (C) Mean change in freezing elicited by the first CS in the memory test of trace fear conditioning. Change in freezing was calculated by computing the difference (F2 − F1) for each mouse, where F1 was freezing for the pre-CS period (0–60 s) and F2 was freezing for an equally long period during the ITI (75–135 s). Scores were averaged across animals, so that each column represents the mean value ± SEM for each mouse group. Asterisk indicates p < 0.0001 (one-way ANOVA between controls and mutants). The inset shows the mean change in freezing expressed as normalized cumulative distributions. Colors: control, red; NR1-CA1-KO, black; naive, blue; pseudo-conditioned, green. Neuron 2000 25, 473-480DOI: (10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5)

Figure 4 NR1-CA1-KO Mice Are Intact on Delay Fear Conditioning (A) Time course of the average percent freezing displayed by mutants (n = 13) and controls (n = 15) during the acquisition of delay conditioning. The gray box, at left, indicates the initial three trials, which are enlarged in (B). (B) Pooled data showing the average percent freezing on the initial phase of acquisition for NR1-CA1-KOs (closed circles) and controls (open circles). Symbols represent mean freezing (± SEM) on a 10 s epoch. CS presentations are indicated by gray bars and US occurrence by green bars. (C) Pooled data showing the average percent freezing on the initial three trials of the 24 hr test after delay training for NR1-CA1-KOs (closed circles) and controls (open circles). Neuron 2000 25, 473-480DOI: (10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5)

Figure 5 Putative Neural Substrate for Trace Fear Conditioning (A) The trace circuit shows the brain regions underlying the association of the CS (tone) with the US (shock) across the trace interval. The CS, spatial, and nonspatial cues are processed in neocortex and converge into the hippocampus (H). We hypothesize that NMDAR-dependent synaptic plasticity (indicated by Δ1) is needed to associate the spatial and nonspatial cues with the CS. This relational representation is fed into the amygdala (A), which associates it with the US via synaptic plasticity (Δ2). The trace circuit terminates in the periaqueductal gray, which executes the conditional response (freezing). (B) The delay circuit is simpler and requires the conjunction of the CS (tone) with the US (shock) in the amygdala. Notice that the CS representation reaches the amygdala from the auditory thalamus as well as from the auditory cortex. The delay circuit finishes in the periaqueductal gray, which executes the conditional response (freezing). Neuron 2000 25, 473-480DOI: (10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80909-5)