4.7 Article

β-adrenergic receptor activation facilitates induction of a protein synthesis-dependent late phase of long-term potentiation

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 25, 期 13, 页码 3294-3303

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4175-04.2005

关键词

noradrenergic receptors; LTP; hippocampus; protein synthesis; memory; neuromodulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Long-term potentiation (LTP) is activity-dependent enhancement of synaptic strength that can critically regulate long-term memory storage. Like memory, LTP exhibits at least two mechanistically distinct temporal phases. Early LTP (E-LTP) does not require protein synthesis, whereas the late phase of LTP (L-LTP), like long-term memory, requires protein synthesis. Hippocampal beta-adrenergic receptors can regulate expression of both E-LTP and long-term memory. Although beta-adrenergic receptor activation enhances the ability of subthreshold stimuli to induce E-LTP, it is unclear whether such activation can facilitate induction of L-LTP. Here, we use electrophysiological recording methods on mouse hippocampal slices to show that when synaptic stimulation that is subthreshold for inducing L-LTP is paired with beta-adrenergic receptor activation, the resulting LTP persists for over 6 h in area CA1. Like L-LTP induced by multiple trains of high-frequency electrical stimulation, this LTP requires protein synthesis. Unlike tetanus-induced L-LTP, however, L-LTP induced by beta-adrenergic receptor activation during subthreshold stimulation appears to involve dendritic protein synthesis but not somatic transcription. Maintenance of this LTP also requires activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERKs). Thus, beta-adrenergic receptor activation elicits a type of L-LTP that requires translation and ERK activation but not transcription. This form of L-LTP may be a cellular mechanism for facilitation of behavioral long-term memory during periods of heightened emotional arousal that engage the noradrenergic modulatory system.

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