No abstract

No abstract

Reactivated long-term memories can become labile and sensitive to modification. Memories in this destabilized state can be weakened or strengthened, but there is limited research characterizing the mechanisms underlying retrieval-induced qualitative updates (i.e., information integration). We have previously implicated cholinergic transmission in object memory destabilization. Here we present a novel rodent paradigm developed to assess the role of this cholinergic mechanism in qualitative object memory updating. The post-reactivation object memory modification (PROMM) task exposes rats to contextual information following object memory reactivation. Subsequent object exploratory performance suggests that the contextual information is integrated with the original memory in a reactivation- and time-dependent manner. This effect is blocked by interference with M1 muscarinic receptors and several downstream signals in perirhinal cortex. These findings therefore demonstrate a hitherto unacknowledged cognitive function for acetylcholine with important implications for understanding the dynamic nature of long-term memory storage in the normal and aging brain.

No abstract

Reminder cues can destabilize consolidated memories, rendering them modifiable before they return to a stable state through the process of reconsolidation. Older and stronger memories resist this process and require the presentation of reminders along with salient novel information in order to destabilize. Previously, we demonstrated in rats that novelty-induced object memory destabilization requires acetylcholine (ACh) activity at M1 muscarinic receptors. Other research predominantly has focused on glutamate, which modulates fear memory destabilization and reconsolidation through GluN2B- and GluN2A-containing NMDARs, respectively. In the current study, we demonstrate the same dissociable roles of GluN2B- and N2A-containing NMDARs in perirhinal cortex (PRh) for object memory destabilization and reconsolidation when boundary conditions are absent. However, neither GluN2 receptor subtype was required for novelty-induced destabilization of remote, resistant memories. Furthermore, GluN2B and GluN2A subunit proteins were upregulated selectively in PRh 24 h after learning, but returned to baseline by 48 h, suggesting that NMDARs, unlike muscarinic receptors, have only a temporary role in object memory destabilization. Indeed, activation of M1 receptors in PRh at the time of reactivation effectively destabilized remote memories despite inhibition of GluN2B-containing NMDARs. These findings suggest that cholinergic activity at M1 receptors overrides boundary conditions to destabilize resistant memories when other established mechanisms are insufficient.