4.7 Article

Context and Auditory Fear are Differentially Regulated by HDAC3 Activity in the Lateral and Basal Subnuclei of the Amygdala

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 42, 期 6, 页码 1284-1294

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/npp.2016.274

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
  2. National Institute on Aging (NIA) [MH101491, AG051807, AG050787, T32 AG000096-31, F32 AG052303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Histone acetylation is a fundamental epigenetic mechanism that is dynamically regulated during memory formation. Histone acetyltransferases (HATs) and histone deacetylases (HDACs) compete to modulate histone acetylation, allowing for rapid changes in acetylation in response to a learning event. HDACs are known to be powerful negative regulators of memory formation, but it is not clear whether this function depends on HDAC enzymatic activity per se. Here, we tested whether the enzymatic activity of an individual Class I HDAC, HDAC3, has a role in fear memory formation in subregions of the hippocampus and amygdala. We found that fear conditioning drove expression of the immediate early genes cFos and Nr4a2 in the hippocampus, which coincided with reduced HDAC3 occupancy at these promoters. Using a dominant-negative, deacetylase-dead point mutant virus (AAV-HDAC3(Y298H)-v5), we found that selectively blocking HDAC3 deacetylase activity in either the dorsal hippocampus or basal nucleus of the amygdala enhanced context fear without affecting tone fear. Blocking HDAC3 activity in the lateral nucleus of the amygdala, on the other hand, enhanced tone, but not context fear memory. These results show for the first time that the enzymatic activity of HDAC3 functions to negatively regulate fear memory formation. Further, HDAC3 activity regulates different aspects of fear memory in the basal and lateral subregions of the amygdala. Thus, the deacetylase activity of HDAC3 is a powerful negative regulator of fear memory formation in multiple subregions of the fear circuit.

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