A genetic link between discriminative fear coding by the lateral amygdala, dopamine, and fear generalization

The lateral amygdala (LA) acquires differential coding of predictive and non-predictive fear stimuli that is critical for proper fear memory assignment. The neurotransmitter dopamine is an important modulator of LA activity and facilitates fear memory formation, but whether dopamine neurons aid in the establishment of discriminative fear coding by the LA is unknown. NMDA-type glutamate receptors in dopamine neurons are critical for the prevention of generalized fear following an aversive experience, suggesting a potential link between a cell autonomous function of NMDAR in dopamine neurons and fear coding by the LA. Here, we utilized mice with a selective genetic inactivation functional NMDARs in dopamine neurons (DAT-NR1 KO mice) combined with behavior, in vivo electrophysiology, and ex vivo electrophysiology in LA neurons to demonstrate that plasticity underlying differential fear coding in the LA is regulated by NMDAR signaling in dopamine neurons and alterations in this plasticity is associated non-discriminative cued-fear responses.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08969.001

When we experience a situation that causes us to feel fearful, the brain processes information about the events that led up to it. This information is encoded by groups of nerve cells called neurons in a region of the brain called the lateral amygdala. The nerve cells communicate with each other through chemicals called neurotransmitters. At a junction between two neurons—called a synapse—neurotransmitters are released from one cell and influence the activity of the other cell.

Long-term changes in the strength of these communications in response to specific cues underlie the formation of memories about fearful events. When these changes occur incorrectly they can lead to memories about particular events becoming inaccurate, which can lead to fear being associated with related, but non-threatening, situations. This ‘generalization’ of fear can lead to generalized anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that plays an important role in forming memories of fearful events. However, it is not clear whether neurons that release dopamine are also involved in correctly discriminating fearful events from non-fearful ones.

‘Receptor’ proteins called NMDARs on the surface of neurons that release dopamine are critical for preventing generalized fear. These receptors detect another neurotransmitter called glutamate. Jones et al. used genetics and ‘electrophysiology’ techniques to study these receptors in mice. The experiments show that a gene that encodes part of an NMDAR in dopamine neurons plays a key role in how fear memories are formed. When this gene is selectively switched off in the dopamine neurons, mice are more likely to develop generalized fear and anxiety behaviors after a threatening experience.

The experiments also demonstrate that these generalized threat responses are associated with differences in the way the synaptic connections in the lateral amygdala are strengthened. The next major challenge will be to find out which specific synaptic connections are strengthened and to establish how dopamine neuron activity patterns influences this connectivity.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08969.002

Dynamic microtubules promote synaptic NMDA receptor-dependent spine enlargement

Most excitatory synaptic terminals in the brain impinge on dendritic spines. We and others have recently shown that dynamic microtubules (MTs) enter spines from the dendritic shaft. However, a direct role for MTs in long-lasting spine plasticity has yet to be demonstrated and it remains unclear whether MT-spine invasions are directly influenced by synaptic activity. Lasting changes in spine morphology and synaptic strength can be triggered by activation of synaptic NMDA receptors (NMDARs) and are associated with learning and memory processes. To determine whether MTs are involved in NMDAR-dependent spine plasticity, we imaged MT dynamics and spine morphology in live mouse hippocampal pyramidal neurons before and after acute activation of synaptic NMDARs. Synaptic NMDAR activation promoted MT-spine invasions and lasting increases in spine size, with invaded spines exhibiting significantly faster and more growth than non-invaded spines. Even individual MT invasions triggered rapid increases in spine size that persisted longer following NMDAR activation. Inhibition of either NMDARs or dynamic MTs blocked NMDAR-dependent spine growth. Together these results demonstrate for the first time that MT-spine invasions are positively regulated by signaling through synaptic NMDARs, and contribute to long-lasting structural changes in targeted spines.

Bistable network behavior of layer I interneurons in auditory cortex

GABAergic interneurons in many areas of the neocortex are mutually connected via chemical and electrical synapses. Previous computational studies have explored how these coupling parameters influence the firing patterns of interneuronal networks. These models have predicted that the stable states of such interneuronal networks will be either synchrony (near zero phase lag) or antisynchrony (phase lag near one-half of the interspike interval), depending on network connectivity and firing rates. In certain parameter regimens, the network can be bistable, settling into either stable state depending on the initial conditions. Here, we investigated how connectivity parameters influence spike patterns in paired recordings from layer I interneurons in brain slices from juvenile mice. Observed properties of chemical and electrical synapses were used to simulate connections between uncoupled cells via dynamic clamp. In uncoupled pairs, action potentials induced by constant depolarizing currents had randomly distributed phase differences between the two cells. When coupled with simulated chemical (inhibitory) synapses, however, these pairs exhibited a bimodal firing pattern, tending to fire either in synchrony or in antisynchrony. Combining electrical with chemical synapses, prolonging tau(Decay) of inhibitory connections, or increasing the firing rate of the network all resulted in enhanced stability of the synchronous state. Thus, electrical and inhibitory synaptic coupling constrain the relative timing of spikes in a two-cell network to, at most, two stable states, the stability and precision of which depend on the exact parameters of coupling.

Modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid type A receptor-mediated spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic currents in auditory cortex by midazolam and isoflurane

BACKGROUND

Anesthetic agents that target gamma-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA(A)) receptors modulate cortical auditory evoked responses in vivo, but the cellular targets involved are unidentified. Also, for agents with multiple protein targets, the relative contribution of modulation of GABA(A) receptors to effects on cortical physiology is unclear. The authors compared effects of the GABA(A) receptor-specific drug midazolam with the volatile anesthetic isoflurane on spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic currents (sIPSCs) in pyramidal cells of auditory cortex.

METHODS

Whole cell recordings were obtained in murine brain slices at 34 degrees C. GABA(A) sIPSCs were isolated by blocking ionotropic glutamate receptors. Effects of midazolam and isoflurane on time course, amplitude, and frequency of sIPSCs were measured.

RESULTS

The authors detected no effect of midazolam at 0.01 microM on sIPSCs, whereas midazolam at 0.1 and 1 microM prolonged the decay of sIPSCs by approximately 25 and 70%, respectively. Isoflurane at 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5 mm prolonged sIPSCs by approximately 45, 150, and 240%, respectively. No drug-specific effects were observed on rise time or frequency of sIPSCs. Isoflurane at 0.5 mm caused a significant decrease in sIPSC amplitude.

CONCLUSIONS

The dose dependence of isoflurane effects on GABA(A) sIPSCs in pyramidal cells is consistent with effects on auditory evoked response in vivo. By contrast, comparable effects of midazolam on GABA(A) sIPSCs arise at concentrations exceeding those currently thought to be achieved in vivo, suggesting that the cellular targets of midazolam reside elsewhere in the thalamocortical circuit or that the concentration of midazolam reached in the brain is higher than currently believed.