Inhibitory avoidance impairments induced by intra-amygdala propranolol are reversed by glutamate but not glucose

β-adrenergic modulation of discrimination learning and memory in the auditory cortex

Despite vast literature on catecholaminergic neuromodulation of auditory cortex functioning in general, knowledge about its role for long‐term memory formation is scarce. Our previous pharmacological studies on cortex‐dependent frequency‐modulated tone‐sweep discrimination learning of Mongolian gerbils showed that auditory‐cortical D_1/5‐dopamine receptor activity facilitates memory consolidation and anterograde memory formation. Considering overlapping functions of D_1/5‐dopamine receptors and β‐adrenoceptors, we hypothesised a role of β‐adrenergic signalling in the auditory cortex for sweep discrimination learning and memory. Supporting this hypothesis, the β_1/2‐adrenoceptor antagonist propranolol bilaterally applied to the gerbil auditory cortex after task acquisition prevented the discrimination increment that was normally monitored 1 day later. The increment in the total number of hurdle crossings performed in response to the sweeps per se was normal. Propranolol infusion after the seventh training session suppressed the previously established sweep discrimination. The suppressive effect required antagonist injection in a narrow post‐session time window. When applied to the auditory cortex 1 day before initial conditioning, β₁‐adrenoceptor‐antagonising and β₁‐adrenoceptor‐stimulating agents retarded and facilitated, respectively, sweep discrimination learning, whereas β₂‐selective drugs were ineffective. In contrast, single‐sweep detection learning was normal after propranolol infusion. By immunohistochemistry, β₁‐ and β₂‐adrenoceptors were identified on the neuropil and somata of pyramidal and non‐pyramidal neurons of the gerbil auditory cortex. The present findings suggest that β‐adrenergic signalling in the auditory cortex has task‐related importance for discrimination learning of complex sounds: as previously shown for D_1/5‐dopamine receptor signalling, β‐adrenoceptor activity supports long‐term memory consolidation and reconsolidation; additionally, tonic input through β₁‐adrenoceptors may control mechanisms permissive for memory acquisition.

Immediate post-defeat infusions of the noradrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol impair the consolidation of conditioned defeat in male Syrian hamsters

Social defeat occurs when an animal is attacked and subjugated by an aggressive conspecific. Following social defeat, male Syrian hamsters fail to display species-typical territorial aggression and instead exhibit submissive or defensive behaviors even when in the presence of a non-aggressive intruder. We have termed this phenomenon conditioned defeat (CD). The mechanisms underlying CD are not fully understood, but data from our lab suggest that at least some of the mechanisms are similar to those that mediate classical fear conditioning. The goal of the present experiment was to test the hypothesis that noradrenergic signaling promotes the consolidation of CD, as in classical fear conditioning, by determining whether CD is disrupted by post-training blockade of noradrenergic activity. In Experiment 1, we determined whether systemic infusions of the noradrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol (0, 1.0, 10, or 20mg/kg) given immediately after a 15 min defeat by a resident aggressor would impair CD tested 48 h later. Hamsters that were given immediate post-training infusions of propranolol (1.0, but not 10 or 20mg/kg) showed significantly less submissive behavior than did those given vehicle infusions supporting the hypothesis that there is noradrenergic modulation of the consolidation of a social defeat experience. In Experiment 2, we demonstrated that propranolol (1.0mg/kg) given immediately, but not 4 or 24h, after defeat impaired CD tested 48 h after defeat indicating that the window within which the memory for social defeat is susceptible to beta-adrenergic modulation is temporary. In Experiment 3, we examined whether central blockade of noradrenergic receptors could recapitulate the effect of systemic injections by giving an intracerebroventricular infusion of propranolol immediately after defeat and examining the effect on CD 24h later. Centrally administered propranolol (20 μg/3 μl but not 2 μg/3 μl) was also effective in dose-dependently reducing consolidation of CD. Collectively, the present results indicate that noradrenergic activity promotes the consolidation of CD and suggest that CD is a valuable model to study the processes by which emotion and stress modulate memory in an ethologically relevant context. These data also suggest that the popular conception in the clinical literature that the anxiolytic effect of propranolol is primarily due to the drug's peripheral effects may need to be reconsidered.

Post-retrieval propranolol treatment does not modulate reconsolidation or extinction of ethanol-induced conditioned place preference

The reconsolidation hypothesis posits that established emotional memories, when reactivated, become labile and susceptible to disruption. Post-retrieval injection of propranolol (PRO), a nonspecific β-adrenergic receptor antagonist, impairs subsequent retention performance of a cocaine- and a morphine-induced conditioned place preference (CPP), implicating the noradrenergic system in the reconsolidation processes of drug-seeking behavior. An important question is whether post-retrieval PRO disrupts memory for the drug-cue associations, or instead interferes with extinction. In the present study, we evaluated the role of the β-adrenergic system on the reconsolidation and extinction of ethanol-induced CPP. Male DBA/2J mice were trained using a weak or a strong conditioning procedure, achieved by varying the ethanol conditioning dose (1 or 2 g/kg) and the number of ethanol trials (2 or 4). After acquisition of ethanol CPP, animals were given a single post-retrieval injection of PRO (0, 10 or 30 mg/kg) and tested for memory reconsolidation 24 h later. Also, after the first reconsolidation test, mice received 18 additional 15-min choice extinction tests in which PRO was injected immediately after every test. Contrary to the prediction of the reconsolidation hypothesis, a single PRO injection after the retrieval test did not modify subsequent memory retention. In addition, repeated post-retrieval administration of PRO did not interfere with extinction of CPP in mice. Overall, our data suggest that the β-adrenergic receptor does not modulate the associative processes underlying ethanol CPP.

Memory modulation

Our memories are not all created equally strong: Some experiences are well remembered while others are remembered poorly, if at all. Research on memory modulation investigates the neurobiological processes and systems that contribute to such differences in the strength of our memories. Extensive evidence from both animal and human research indicates that emotionally significant experiences activate hormonal and brain systems that regulate the consolidation of newly acquired memories. These effects are integrated through noradrenergic activation of the basolateral amygdala that regulates memory consolidation via interactions with many other brain regions involved in consolidating memories of recent experiences. Modulatory systems not only influence neurobiological processes underlying the consolidation of new information, but also affect other mnemonic processes, including memory extinction, memory recall, and working memory. In contrast to their enhancing effects on consolidation, adrenal stress hormones impair memory retrieval and working memory. Such effects, as with memory consolidation, require noradrenergic activation of the basolateral amygdala and interactions with other brain regions.

Lidocaine attenuates anisomycin-induced amnesia and release of norepinephrine in the amygdala

When administered near the time of training, protein synthesis inhibitors such as anisomycin impair later memory. A common interpretation of these findings is that memory consolidation requires new protein synthesis initiated by training. However, recent findings support an alternative interpretation that abnormally large increases in neurotransmitter release after injections of anisomycin may be responsible for producing amnesia. In the present study, a local anesthetic was administered prior to anisomycin injections in an attempt to mitigate neurotransmitter actions and thereby attenuate the resulting amnesia. Rats received lidocaine and anisomycin injections into the amygdala 130 and 120 min, respectively, prior to inhibitory avoidance training. Memory tests 48 h later revealed that lidocaine attenuated anisomycin-induced amnesia. In other rats, in vivo microdialysis was performed at the site of amygdala infusion of lidocaine and anisomycin. As seen previously, anisomycin injections produced large increases in release of norepinephrine in the amygdala. Lidocaine attenuated the anisomycin-induced increase in release of norepinephrine but did not reverse anisomycin inhibition of protein synthesis, as assessed by c-Fos immunohistochemistry. These findings are consistent with past evidence suggesting that anisomycin causes amnesia by initiating abnormal release of neurotransmitters in response to the inhibition of protein synthesis.

Stress-dependent impairment of passive-avoidance memory by propranolol or naloxone

Previous work has shown that the effect of opioid-receptor blockade on memory modulation is critically dependent upon the intensity of stress. The current study determined the effect of adrenergic-receptor blockade on memory modulation under varied levels of stress and then compared the effect of adrenergic-receptor blockade under intense stress to that of a) opioid-receptor blockade and b) concurrent opioid- and adrenergic-receptor blockade. In the first experiment, the β-adrenergic-receptor blocker propranolol impaired retention in the passive-avoidance procedure when administered immediately after exposure to intense stress (passive-avoidance training followed by swim stress) but not mild stress (passive-avoidance training alone). In the second experiment, while separate administration of either propranolol or the opioid-receptor blocker naloxone immediately after exposure to intense stress impaired retention, the combined administration of propranolol and naloxone failed to do so. These findings demonstrate that the effect of β-adrenergic-receptor blockade or opioid-receptor blockade on memory modulation in the passive-avoidance procedure is dependent upon the intensity of stress, and suggest that concurrent inactivation of endogenous adrenergic- and opioid-based memory modulation systems under stressful conditions is protective of memory.

Septal co-infusions of glucose with the benzodiazepine agonist chlordiazepoxide impair memory, but co-infusions of glucose with the opiate morphine do not

We have found repeatedly that medial septal (MS) infusions of glucose impair memory when co-infused with the gamma-amino butyric acid (GABA) agonist muscimol. The present experiments sought to determine whether the memory-impairing effects of this concentration of glucose would generalize to another GABA(A) receptor agonist and to an agonist from another neurotransmitter system that is known to impair memory. Specifically, we determined whether the dose of glucose that produces memory deficits when combined with muscimol in the MS would also impair memory when co-infused with the GABA(A) receptor modulator chlordiazepoxide (CDP) or the opiate morphine. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were given MS co-infusions and then 15 min later tested for spontaneous alternation or given shock avoidance training (retention tested 48 h later). The results showed that MS infusions of the higher dose of glucose with morphine did not produce memory deficits, whereas, the performance of rats given MS co-infusions of CDP with glucose was impaired. These findings suggest that the memory-impairing effects of brain glucose administration may involve an interaction with the GABA(A) receptor.

Protein synthesis inhibition and memory: formation vs amnesia

Studies using protein synthesis inhibitors have provided key support for the prevalent view that memory formation requires the initiation of protein synthesis as a primary element of the molecular biology of memory. However, many other interpretations of the amnesia data have received far less attention. These include: (a) protein synthesis may play a constitutive role in memory formation, providing proteins prior to an experience that can be activated by training; (b) protein synthesis may be needed to replace proteins available prior to learning but 'consumed' by learning; (c) inhibition of protein synthesis impairs the well-being of neurons, leading to an inability to deliver resources needed for memory formation; and (d) inhibition of protein synthesis results in abnormal neural functions that interfere with memory. One of these, abnormal release of neurotransmitters after inhibition of protein synthesis, is detailed here, along with a review of many circumstances in which it appears that protein synthesis at the time of training is not required for the formation of new memories. Evidence of activation of cell signaling molecules and transcription factors is another form of support for a role of training-initiated protein synthesis in memory. However, recent findings suggest that many of these molecules are activated by training and remain activated for days after training, i.e. activated for times well beyond those typically invoked for memory consolidation processes. Reviewing these results, this paper suggests that the long-lasting molecular changes may be the basis of a form of intracellular memory, one responsible for up-regulating the probability that a neuron, once activated in this manner, will engage in future plasticity. This view melds ideas of modulation of memory with those of consolidation of memory.

Hippocampal infusions of glucose reverse memory deficits produced by co-infusions of a GABA receptor agonist

Although septal infusions of glucose typically have positive effects on memory, we have shown repeatedly that this treatment exacerbates memory deficits produced by co-infusions of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists. The present experiments tested whether this negative interaction between glucose and GABA in the medial septum would be observed in the hippocampus, a brain region where glucose typically has positive effects on memory. Specifically, we determined whether hippocampal infusions of glucose would reverse or exacerbate memory deficits produced by hippocampal co-infusions of the GABA receptor agonist muscimol. Fifteen minutes prior to either assessing spontaneous alternation (SA) or continuous multiple trial inhibitory avoidance (CMIA) training, male Sprague-Dawley-derived rats were given bilateral hippocampal infusions of vehicle (phosphate-buffered saline [PBS], 1 microl/2 min), glucose (33 or 50 nmol), muscimol (0.3 or 0.4 microg, SA or 3 microg, CMIA) or muscimol and glucose combined in one solution. The results indicated that hippocampal infusions of muscimol alone decreased SA scores and CMIA retention latencies. More importantly, hippocampal infusions of glucose, at doses that had no effect when infused alone, attenuated (33 nmol) or reversed (50 nmol) the muscimol-induced memory deficits. Thus, although co-infusions of glucose with muscimol into the medial septum impair memory, the present findings show that an opposite effect is observed in the hippocampus. Collectively, these findings suggest that the memory-impairing interaction between glucose and GABA in the medial septum is not a general property of the brain, but rather is brain region-dependent.

Enhanced retention in the passive-avoidance task by 5-HT(1A) receptor blockade is not associated with increased activity of the central nucleus of the amygdala

The effect of blockade of 5-HT1A receptors was investigated on (1). retention in a mildly aversive passive-avoidance task, and (2). spontaneous single-unit activity of central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) neurons, a brain site implicated in modulation of retention. Systemic administration of the selective 5-HT1A antagonist NAN-190 immediately after training markedly-and dose-dependently-facilitated retention in the passive-avoidance task; enhanced retention was time-dependent and was not attributable to variations in wattages of shock received by animals. Systemic administration of NAN-190 had mixed effects on spontaneous single-unit activity of CeA neurons recorded extracellularly in vivo; microiontophoretic application of 5-HT, in contrast, consistently and potently suppressed CeA activity. The present findings-that 5-HT1A receptor blockade by NAN-190 (1). enhances retention in the passive-avoidance task, and (2). does not consistently increase spontaneous neuronal activity of the CeA-provide evidence that a serotonergic system tonically inhibits modulation of retention in the passive-avoidance task through activation of the 5-HT1A receptor subtype at brain sites located outside the CeA.

Memory modulation across neural systems: intra-amygdala glucose reverses deficits caused by intraseptal morphine on a spatial task but not on an aversive task

Based largely on dissociations of the effects of different lesions on learning and memory, memories for different attributes appear to be organized in independent neural systems. Results obtained with direct injections of drugs into one brain region at a time support a similar conclusion. The present experiments investigated the effects of simultaneous pharmacological manipulation of two neural systems, the amygdala and the septohippocampal system, to examine possible interactions of memory modulation across systems. Morphine injected into the medial septum impaired memory both for avoidance training and during spontaneous alternation. When glucose was concomitantly administered to the amygdala, glucose reversed the morphine-induced deficits in memory during alternation but not for avoidance training. These results suggest that the amygdala is involved in modulation of spatial memory processes and that direct injections of memory-modulating drugs into the amygdala do not always modulate memory for aversive events. These findings are contrary to predictions from the findings of lesion studies and of studies using direct injections of drugs into single brain areas. Thus, the independence of neural systems responsible for processing different classes of memory is less clear than implied by studies using lesions or injections of drugs into single brain areas.