↓ Skip to main content

Frequency-specific stimulations induce reconsolidation of long-term potentiation in freely moving rats

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Brain, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Frequency-specific stimulations induce reconsolidation of long-term potentiation in freely moving rats
Published in
Molecular Brain, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13041-016-0216-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reiko Okubo-Suzuki, Yoshito Saitoh, Mohammad Shehata, Qi Zhao, Hiroshi Enomoto, Kaoru Inokuchi

Abstract

When consolidated memories are retrieved, they become labile and a new protein synthesis-dependent reconsolidation process is required to restabilize these memories. So far, most studies conducted on reconsolidation rely on the analyses of animal behavior, leaving the synaptic mechanisms that underlie reconsolidation largely unclear. Here, we examined whether the reconsolidation process occurs in hippocampal long term potentiation (LTP), as a synaptic model that is correlated with long term memories (LTM). We employed LTP system in the dentate gyrus of freely moving rats that lasts for weeks simulating LTM. LTP was induced by high frequency stimulation at 400 Hz (HFS400), and as a reactivation stimulation, we tested a low frequency stimulation at 0.1 Hz (LFS0.1), a theta stimulation at 8 Hz (TS8), or HFS400. Unlike HFS400 reactivation, both LFS0.1 and TS8 induced a reconsolidation-like phenomenon and rendered the LTP labile to protein synthesis inhibition by anisomycin. Without reactivation, LTP remained unaffected by protein synthesis inhibition. In addition, the TS8-induced LTP reconsolidation was NMDAR dependent. Our results indicate that, as with behavioral LTM, there are boundary conditions for LTP reconsolidation where only a certain range of frequency stimulations as reactivation can destabilize the consolidated LTP. This LTP reconsolidation system will be useful for future elucidation of the synaptic reconsolidation mechanism.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 10%
Unknown 19 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 33%
Student > Master 5 24%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 33%
Psychology 3 14%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2017.
All research outputs
#17,795,140
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Brain
#749
of 1,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,972
of 300,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Brain
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.