Ventral midline thalamus is not necessary for systemic consolidation of a social memory in the rat.

Brain and neuroscience advances Pub Date : 2020-07-21 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2398212820939738
Etienne Quet, Jean-Christophe Cassel, Brigitte Cosquer, Marine Galloux, Anne Pereira De Vasconcelos, Aline Stéphan
{"title":"Ventral midline thalamus is not necessary for systemic consolidation of a social memory in the rat.","authors":"Etienne Quet,&nbsp;Jean-Christophe Cassel,&nbsp;Brigitte Cosquer,&nbsp;Marine Galloux,&nbsp;Anne Pereira De Vasconcelos,&nbsp;Aline Stéphan","doi":"10.1177/2398212820939738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to the standard theory of memory consolidation, recent memories are stored in the hippocampus before their transfer to cortical modules, a process called systemic consolidation. The ventral midline thalamus (reuniens and rhomboid nuclei, ReRh) takes part in this transfer as its lesion disrupts systemic consolidation of spatial and contextual fear memories. Here, we wondered whether ReRh lesions would also affect the systemic consolidation of another type of memory, namely an olfaction-based social memory. To address this question we focused on social transmission of food preference. Adult Long-Evans rats were subjected to N-methyl-d-aspartate-induced, fibre-sparing lesions of the ReRh nuclei or to a sham-operation, and subsequently trained in a social transmission of food preference paradigm. Retrieval was tested on the next day (recent memory, n<sub>Sham</sub> = 10, n<sub>ReRh</sub> = 12) or after a 25-day delay (remote memory, n<sub>Sham</sub> = 10, n<sub>ReRh</sub> = 10). All rats, whether sham-operated or subjected to ReRh lesions, learned and remembered the task normally, whatever the delay. Compared to our former results on spatial and contextual fear memories (Ali et al., 2017; Klein et al., 2019; Loureiro et al., 2012; Quet et al., 2020), the present findings indicate that the ReRh nuclei might not be part of a generic, systemic consolidation mechanism processing all kinds of memories in order to make them persistent. The difference between social transmission of food preference and spatial or contextual fear memories could be explained by the fact that social transmission of food preference is not hippocampus-dependent and that the persistence of social transmission of food preference memory relies on different circuits.</p>","PeriodicalId":72444,"journal":{"name":"Brain and neuroscience advances","volume":"4 ","pages":"2398212820939738"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2398212820939738","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain and neuroscience advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2398212820939738","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

According to the standard theory of memory consolidation, recent memories are stored in the hippocampus before their transfer to cortical modules, a process called systemic consolidation. The ventral midline thalamus (reuniens and rhomboid nuclei, ReRh) takes part in this transfer as its lesion disrupts systemic consolidation of spatial and contextual fear memories. Here, we wondered whether ReRh lesions would also affect the systemic consolidation of another type of memory, namely an olfaction-based social memory. To address this question we focused on social transmission of food preference. Adult Long-Evans rats were subjected to N-methyl-d-aspartate-induced, fibre-sparing lesions of the ReRh nuclei or to a sham-operation, and subsequently trained in a social transmission of food preference paradigm. Retrieval was tested on the next day (recent memory, nSham = 10, nReRh = 12) or after a 25-day delay (remote memory, nSham = 10, nReRh = 10). All rats, whether sham-operated or subjected to ReRh lesions, learned and remembered the task normally, whatever the delay. Compared to our former results on spatial and contextual fear memories (Ali et al., 2017; Klein et al., 2019; Loureiro et al., 2012; Quet et al., 2020), the present findings indicate that the ReRh nuclei might not be part of a generic, systemic consolidation mechanism processing all kinds of memories in order to make them persistent. The difference between social transmission of food preference and spatial or contextual fear memories could be explained by the fact that social transmission of food preference is not hippocampus-dependent and that the persistence of social transmission of food preference memory relies on different circuits.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腹侧丘脑中线对大鼠社会记忆的系统巩固不是必需的。
根据记忆巩固的标准理论,最近的记忆在转移到皮层模块之前储存在海马体中,这一过程被称为系统巩固。丘脑腹侧中线(连系核和菱形核,ReRh)参与了这种转移,因为它的病变破坏了空间和情境恐惧记忆的系统巩固。在这里,我们想知道脑皮层皮层损伤是否也会影响另一种类型的记忆的系统巩固,即基于嗅觉的社会记忆。为了解决这个问题,我们关注食物偏好的社会传播。成年Long-Evans大鼠接受n -甲基-d-天冬氨酸诱导的rh核保留纤维损伤或假手术,随后接受食物偏好社会传递范式的训练。在第二天(近期记忆,nSham = 10, nReRh = 12)或延迟25天后(远程记忆,nSham = 10, nReRh = 10)进行检索。所有的大鼠,无论是假手术还是脑部损伤,无论延迟多久,都能正常地学习和记忆任务。与我们之前在空间和情境恐惧记忆方面的结果相比(Ali et al., 2017;Klein等人,2019;Loureiro et al., 2012;Quet et al., 2020),目前的研究结果表明,ReRh核可能不是处理各种记忆以使其持久的通用系统巩固机制的一部分。食物偏好的社会传递与空间或情境恐惧记忆之间的差异可以用以下事实来解释:食物偏好的社会传递不依赖于海马体,而食物偏好记忆的社会传递的持久性依赖于不同的回路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Review of the gastric physiology of disgust: Proto-nausea as an under-explored facet of the gut-brain axis. From neurophobia to neurophilia: Fostering confidence and passion for neurology in medical students. Are all neuroscience degrees the same? A comparison of undergraduate neuroscience degrees across the United Kingdom. Centralising a loss of consciousness to the central medial thalamus. Genetically modified animals as models of neurodevelopmental conditions: A review of systematic review reporting quality.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1