Abstract:A distinction has always been made between long-term and short-term memory (also now called working memory, WM). The obvious difference between these two kinds of memory concerns the duration of information storage: information is supposedly transiently stored in WM while it is considered durably consolidated into long-term memory. It is well acknowledged that the content of WM is erased and reset after a short time, to prevent irrelevant information from proactively interfering with newly stored information. … Show more
“…Such difference in the level of performance of rats trained in LIWM and HIWM tasks has systematically been observed in previous studies (Fraize et al, 2016(Fraize et al, , 2017Joseph et al, 2015;Missaire et al, 2017) and likely reflects a non-optimal processing/forgetting of interference in rats training in the HIWM task. This inefficient processing of interference is further revealed by a between-session analysis of performance computed by trials instead of days (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 66%
“…2C). Such analysis shows that a difference in performance is observed between the two groups after a 24hperiod of rest on the very first trials completed on Day 2 (Missaire et al, 2017). This result suggests that 24h-old information may impact the recall of recent (Day 2) information.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…To palliate this lack of knowledge, we conducted a long-term electrophysiological study in freely-moving rats using an innovative comparative behavioral approach. Rats were trained in a radial maze in either a long-term -also called "reference"memory (RM) task, or one of two WM tasks: a Low Interference (LIWM) or a High Interference WM task (HIWM) involving variable levels of proactive interference that differentially alter their level of performance (Fraize et al, 2016(Fraize et al, , 2017Joseph et al, 2015;Missaire et al, 2017). Having previously shown that the dentate gyrus (DG) of the dorsal hippocampus (Fraize et al, 2017;Joseph et al, 2015) could play a major role in processing these interference, we performed long-term recordings of fEPSPs at the perforant path (PP) to DG synapse during two consecutive days.…”
Long-term storage of information into memory is supposed to rely on long-term synaptic plasticity processes. The detection of such synaptic changes after training in long-term/reference memory (RM) tasks has yet been scarce, variable and only studied on a short time scale. Short-term or working memory (WM) is largely known to depend on persistent neuronal activity or short-term plasticity. However, processing information into WM could also involve long-term synaptic changes that could be responsible for the erasure/forgetting of items previously stored in WM and acting as proactive interference. In order to study long-term synaptic changes associated with RM or WM, we trained chronically implanted rats in 3 different radial maze tasks: a classical RM task and 2 WM tasks involving different levels of proactive interference. Synaptic responses in the dentate gyrus were recorded during 2 × 24 h in freely moving rats after training. We found that consolidation of long-term information leads first to a delayed synaptic potentiation, occurring 9 h after RM training that is replaced by a synaptic depression once the RM rule is fully acquired. In contrast, optimal information processing into WM triggers a synaptic depression immediately after training and lasting 3 h that could act as a mechanism for interference erasure/forgetting.
“…Such difference in the level of performance of rats trained in LIWM and HIWM tasks has systematically been observed in previous studies (Fraize et al, 2016(Fraize et al, , 2017Joseph et al, 2015;Missaire et al, 2017) and likely reflects a non-optimal processing/forgetting of interference in rats training in the HIWM task. This inefficient processing of interference is further revealed by a between-session analysis of performance computed by trials instead of days (Fig.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 66%
“…2C). Such analysis shows that a difference in performance is observed between the two groups after a 24hperiod of rest on the very first trials completed on Day 2 (Missaire et al, 2017). This result suggests that 24h-old information may impact the recall of recent (Day 2) information.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…To palliate this lack of knowledge, we conducted a long-term electrophysiological study in freely-moving rats using an innovative comparative behavioral approach. Rats were trained in a radial maze in either a long-term -also called "reference"memory (RM) task, or one of two WM tasks: a Low Interference (LIWM) or a High Interference WM task (HIWM) involving variable levels of proactive interference that differentially alter their level of performance (Fraize et al, 2016(Fraize et al, , 2017Joseph et al, 2015;Missaire et al, 2017). Having previously shown that the dentate gyrus (DG) of the dorsal hippocampus (Fraize et al, 2017;Joseph et al, 2015) could play a major role in processing these interference, we performed long-term recordings of fEPSPs at the perforant path (PP) to DG synapse during two consecutive days.…”
Long-term storage of information into memory is supposed to rely on long-term synaptic plasticity processes. The detection of such synaptic changes after training in long-term/reference memory (RM) tasks has yet been scarce, variable and only studied on a short time scale. Short-term or working memory (WM) is largely known to depend on persistent neuronal activity or short-term plasticity. However, processing information into WM could also involve long-term synaptic changes that could be responsible for the erasure/forgetting of items previously stored in WM and acting as proactive interference. In order to study long-term synaptic changes associated with RM or WM, we trained chronically implanted rats in 3 different radial maze tasks: a classical RM task and 2 WM tasks involving different levels of proactive interference. Synaptic responses in the dentate gyrus were recorded during 2 × 24 h in freely moving rats after training. We found that consolidation of long-term information leads first to a delayed synaptic potentiation, occurring 9 h after RM training that is replaced by a synaptic depression once the RM rule is fully acquired. In contrast, optimal information processing into WM triggers a synaptic depression immediately after training and lasting 3 h that could act as a mechanism for interference erasure/forgetting.
“…Memory formation is a complex process. This is partly due to the information is assumed to be transiently stored in working memory (short-term memory) while it is considered to integrate long-term memory permanently [34]. At present, a lot of knowledge about memory comes from the study of memory impairment, especially amnesia.…”
Background
Astragaloside IV (ASIV) is one of the saponins isolated from Astragalus membranaceus, a widely used traditional Chinese medicine and a health product sold all over the world. However, so far, the effect of ASIV on GABAergic synaptic transmission has not been elucidated yet. In the present study, the effect of ASIV on memory and hippocampal synaptic plasticity was investigated in mice and down-regulated early growth response protein 1 (EGR-1) knockout mice.
Methods
Behavior tests including radial-arm maze test and shuttle-box test, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, western blotting analysis, quantitative PCR, electrophysiological recording, and electron microscopy were used in this study. The difference of data was detected by unpaired student t-test or two-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Mann-Whitney U test.
Results
ASIV was shown to enhance the learning and memory of mice in behavior tests, such as radial-arm maze test and shuttle-box test, as well as the synaptic plasticity in electrophysiological experiments. Moreover, it significantly reduced the concentration of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and the expression of glutamate decarboxylase 2 (GAD65) in mouse hippocampus, which was accompanied with decreased ratio of inhibitory synapses, and EGR-1, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and tyrosine receptor kinase B (TrkB). When EGR-1 was knocked out, the promotive effects of ASIV on memory and synaptic plasticity, as well as the inhibitory effects on GAD65, BDNF and TrkB, were abolished. In addition, ASIV was found to down-regulate the pre-existing EGR-1 baseline to better adapt to the learning stimuli.
Conclusions
Together, these results demonstrated a novel role of ASIV in enhancing memory and modulating hippocampal synaptic plasticity by decreasing GABAergic inhibition through EGR-1 mediated BDNF/TrkB signaling pathway in mice.
“…Memory formation is a complex process. This is partly due to the information is assumed to be transiently stored in short-term memory while it is considered to integrate long-term memory permanently [38]. At present, a lot of knowledge about memory comes from the study of memory impairment, especially amnesia [39][40][41].…”
Background: Astragaloside IV (ASIV) is one of the saponins isolated from Astragalus membranaceus, a widely used traditional Chinese medicine and a health product sold all over the world. However, so far, the effect of ASIV on GABAergic synaptic transmission has not been elucidated yet. In the present study, the effect of ASIV on memory and hippocampal GABAergic synaptic transmission was investigated in wild type and early growth response protein 1 (EGR-1) knockout mice. Methods: Behavioral tests including radial-arm maze test and shuttle-box test, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, western blotting analysis, quantitative PCR, electrophysiological recording, and electron microscopy were used in this study. Results: ASIV was shown to enhance the learning and memory of mice in behavioral tests, such as radial-arm maze test and shuttle-box test. It significantly reduced the concentration of GABA, the expression of glutamate decarboxylase 2 (GAD65) as well as the ratio of inhibitory synapses in mouse hippocampus, which was accompanied with a suppression of hippocampal spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic currents. ASIV administration decreased the expression of EGR-1, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and tyrosine receptor kinase B (TrkB) in the hippocampus. Furthermore, blockage of BDNF/TrkB signaling with K-252a abrogated the effect of ASIV on GAD65 expression. When EGR-1 was knocked out, the promotive effects of ASIV on learning and memory, as well as the inhibitory effects on GABAergic synaptic transmission and GAD65, BDNF and TrkB expression, were abolished. In addition, ASIV was found to down-regulate the pre-existing EGR-1 baseline to better adapt to the learning stimuli. Conclusions: Together, these results demonstrated a novel role of ASIV in enhancing memory and reducing hippocampal GABAergic synaptic transmission through EGR-1 mediated BDNF/TrkB signaling pathway in mice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.