4.7 Article

Aquaporin-4 deficiency facilitates fear memory extinction in the hippocampus through excessive activation of extrasynaptic GluN2B-containing NMDA receptors

期刊

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY
卷 112, 期 -, 页码 124-134

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2016.06.031

关键词

AQP-4; Hippocampus; NMDA receptor; Fear memory extinction; Long-term depression

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB531303, 2014CB744601]
  2. National Natural Scientific Foundation of China [81471377]
  3. National Key Scientific Instrument and Equipment Development Project of China [2013YQ03092306]
  4. PCSIRT [IRT13016]
  5. Science Fund for Creative Research Groups of the Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province [2015CFA020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aquaporin-4 (AQP-4) is the predominant water channel in the brain and primarily expressed in astrocytes. Astrocytes have been generally believed to play important roles in regulating synaptic plasticity and information processing. A growing number of evidence shows that AQP-4 plays a potential role in the regulation of astrocyte function. However, little is known about the function of AQP-4 for synaptic plasticity in the hippocampus. Therefore, we evaluated long-term depression (LTD) in the hippocampus and the extinction of fear memory of AQP-4 knockout (KO) and wild-type (WT) mice. We found that AQP-4 deficiency facilitated fear memory extinction and NMDA receptors (NMDARs)-dependent LTD in the CA3-CA1 pathway. Furthermore, AQP-4 deficiency selectively increased GluN2B-NMDAR-mediated excitatory postsynaptic currents (EPSCs). The excessive activation of extrasynaptic GluN2B-NMDAR contributed to the facilitation of NMDAR-dependent LTD and enhancement of fear memory extinction in AQP-4 KO mice. Thus, it appears that AQP-4 may be a potential target for intervention in fear memory extinction. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Ionotropic glutamate receptors'. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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