Zebrafish forebrain and temporal conditioning

Cheng, Ruey‐Kuang; Jesuthasan, Suresh; Penney, Trevor B.

doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0462

Cited by 74 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a Pavlovian‐like approach, 10‐month‐old babies showed a modulation of ERPs above the frontal cortex, similar to the one seen in adults, in response to an unexpected appearance of a stimulus after training with regular presentation of that stimulus (Brannon et al ). To our knowledge, there is no such study in animals, with the exception of one study in zebrafish larvae (Cheng et al ), which suggests a detection of unexpected omission in structures homologous to the habenula and the amygdala.…”

Section: Ontogeny Of Interval Timingmentioning

confidence: 98%

Developmental emergence of fear/threat learning: neurobiology, associations and timing

Tallot

Doyère

Sullivan

2015

Genes Brain and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pavlovian fear or threat conditioning, where a neutral stimulus takes on aversive properties through pairing with an aversive stimulus, has been an important tool for exploring the neurobiology of learning. In the past decades, this neurobehavioral approach has been expanded to include the developing infant. Indeed, protracted postnatal brain development permits the exploration of how incorporating the amygdala, prefrontal cortex and hippocampus into this learning system impacts the acquisition and expression of aversive conditioning. Here, we review the developmental trajectory of these key brain areas involved in aversive conditioning and relate it to pups’ transition to independence through weaning. Overall, the data suggests that adult-like features of threat learning emerge as the relevant brain areas become incorporated into this learning. Specifically, the developmental emergence of the amygdala permits cue learning and the emergence of the hippocampus permits context learning. We also describe unique features of learning in early life that block threat learning and enhance interaction with the mother or exploration of the environment. Finally, we describe the development of a sense of time within this learning and its involvement in creating associations. Together these data suggest that the development of threat learning is a useful tool for dissecting adult-like functioning of brain circuits, as well as providing unique insights into ecologically relevant developmental changes.

show abstract

Section: Ontogeny Of Interval Timingmentioning

confidence: 98%

Developmental emergence of fear/threat learning: neurobiology, associations and timing

Tallot

Doyère

Sullivan

2015

Genes Brain and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following from other anatomical, pharmacological, and imaging work (e.g., Agostino et al, 2013; Allman & Meck, 2012; Buhusi & Meck, 2005; Cheng, Ali, & Meck, 2007; Cheng, Etchegaray, and Meck, 2007; Cheng, Hakak, and Meck, 2007; Cheng, MacDonald, & Meck, 2006; Gu, Cheng, Yin, & Meck, 2011; Hata, 2011; Jaldow, Oakley, & Davey, 1990; Jones & Jahanshahi, 2011; Lake & Meck, 2012; MacDonald, Cheng, & Meck, 2012; Matell, Bateson, Meck, 2006; Matell, King, & Meck, 2004; Meck, 2006a, b, c; Meck, Cheng, MacDonald, Gainetdinov, Caron, & Çevik, 2012; Meck, Penney, & Pouthas, 2009; Miller, McAuley, & Pang, 2006), combined with sophisticated behavioral and analytic techniques (Cheng & Westwood, 1993; Church, Meck, & Gibbon, 1994; Gibbon & Church, 1990; MacDonald, Cheng, Williams, & Meck, 2007; Meck, 2001; Penney, Gibbon, & Meck, 2008; Rakitin et al, 1998), a number of investigators have proposed that interval timing capacities rely on interactions between cortico-thalamic-basal ganglia and hippocampal circuits (e.g., Cheng, Jesuthasan, & Penney, 2011, 2013; Gu, Laubach, & Meck, 2013; Onoda & Sakata, 2006; Onoda, Takahashi, & Sakata, 2003; Sakata, 2006; Sakata & Onoda, 2003; Yin & Meck, 2013). …”

Section: Search For Neural Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hippocampus, time, and memory—A retrospective analysis.

Meck¹,

Church²,

Matell³

2013

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1984, there was considerable evidence that the hippocampus was important for spatial learning and some evidence that it was also involved in duration discrimination. The article Hippocampus, Time, and Memory (Meck, Church, and Olton, 1984), however, was the first to isolate the effects of hippocampal damage on specific stages of temporal processing. In this review, to celebrate the 30th anniversary of Behavioral Neuroscience, we look back on factors that contributed to the long-lasting influence of this article. The major results were that a fimbria-fornix lesion (a) interferes with the ability to retain information in temporal working memory and (b) distorts the content of temporal reference memory, but (c) it did not decrease sensitivity to signal duration. This was the first lesion experiment in which the results were interpreted by a well-developed theory of behavior (scalar timing theory). It has led to extensive research on the role of the hippocampus in temporal processing by many investigators. The most important ones are the development of computational models with plausible neural mechanisms (such as the Striatal Beat-Frequency model of interval timing), the use of multiple behavioral measures of timing, and empirical research on the neural mechanisms of timing and temporal memory using ensemble recording of neurons in prefrontal-striatal-hippocampal circuits.

show abstract

“…; Cheng et al . ; Manuel et al . ), and on other species which can easily be studied in controlled experiments.…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These are mammalian structures involved in defence and stress responses and expression of instinctive and anxiety-like behaviour (Cheng et al 2014;Silva et al 2015).…”

Section: Phylogeny Of the Underlying Infrastructure: Brains And Neuromentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So far, only fragments of the behavioural architecture of a generalized mesopelagic planktivore have been explored (Giske et al 2013(Giske et al , 2014. While mesopelagic fish are a convenient group to study as they often form acoustic scattering layers allowing observations of short-term natural behaviour related to light, temperature, food and predators (Giske et al 1990;Balino and Aksnes 1993;Goodson et al 1995;Sørnes and Aksnes 2006;Kaartvedt et al 2008;Staby and Aksnes 2011;, we need studies on species where more of the basic biology is and will be known, such as three-spine sticklebacks (Bell and Foster 1994;€ Ostlund-Nilsson et al 2006;Wark et al 2011) and zebrafish (Kalueff et al 2012;Malafoglia et al 2013;Cheng et al 2014;Manuel et al 2015), and on other species which can easily be studied in controlled experiments. A wide taxonomical and ecological range of study organisms is also important as the behavioural architecture will reflect macroevolution, life history and environmental factors (Sund-str€ om et al 2005;Bell et al 2010;Carretero Sanches et al 2015).…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The proximate architecture for decision‐making in fish

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolution has since the very beginning resulted in organisms which can sort fitness-related information from noise, evaluate it and respond to it. In animals, the architecture for proximate control of behaviour and physiology has been gradually evolving since before the Cambrian explosion of animal phyla. It integrates many different survival circuits, for example for danger, feeding and reproduction, and operates through reflexes, instincts, homeostatic drives and precursors to human emotions. Although teleost brains differ substantially from the much better understood brains of terrestrial vertebrates, their anatomy, physiology and neurochemistry all point towards a common and malleable architectural template with strong and flexible effects on fish behaviour and elements of personality. We describe the main components of this architecture and its role in fish behaviour from the perspectives of adaptation, evolutionary history and gene pools. Much research is needed, as several of the basic assumptions for architectural control of behaviour and physiology in teleosts are not thoroughly investigated. We think the architecture for behavioural control can be used to change ecosystem models from a bottom-up perspective to also include behaviourally mediated trophic cascades and trait-mediated indirect effects. We also discuss the utility of modelling based on proximate architectural control for fish welfare studies.

show abstract

Zebrafish forebrain and temporal conditioning

Cited by 74 publications

References 81 publications

Developmental emergence of fear/threat learning: neurobiology, associations and timing

Developmental emergence of fear/threat learning: neurobiology, associations and timing

Hippocampus, time, and memory—A retrospective analysis.

The proximate architecture for decision‐making in fish

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About