4.7 Article

The Central Nucleus of the Amygdala and Corticotropin-Releasing Factor: Insights into Contextual Fear Memory

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 29, 期 22, 页码 7379-7388

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0740-09.2009

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [NS39406]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) has been traditionally viewed in fear conditioning to serve as an output neural center that transfers conditioned information formed in the basolateral amygdala to brain structures that generate emotional responses. Recent studies suggest that the CeA may also be involved in fear memory consolidation. In addition, corticotropin-releasing factor systems were shown to facilitate memory consolidation in the amygdala, which contains a high density of CRF immunoreactive cell bodies and fibers in the lateral part of the CeA (CeAl). However, the involvement of CeA CRF in contextual fear conditioning remains poorly understood. Therefore, we first conducted a series of studies using fiber-sparing lesion and reversible inactivation methods to assess the general role of the CeA in contextual fear. We then used identical training and testing procedures to compare and evaluate the specific function of CeA CRF using CRF antisense oligonucleotides (CRF ASO). Rats microinjected with ibotenic acid, muscimol, or a CRF ASO into the CeA before contextual fear conditioning showed typical levels of freezing during acquisition training but exhibited significant reductions in contextual freezing in a retention test 48 h later. Furthermore, CeA inactivation induced by either muscimol or CRF ASO administration immediately before retention testing did not impair freezing, suggesting that the previously observed retention deficits were caused by inhibition of consolidation rather than fear expression. Collectively, our results suggest CeA involvement in the consolidation of contextual fear memory and specifically implicate CeA CRF as an important mediator.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据