Cited by 141Stress Responses and CortisolMemory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Activity and plasticity in the CA1, the dentate gyrus, and the amygdala following controllable vs. uncontrollable water stress

Kavushansky, Alexandra, Vouimba, Rose‐Marie, Cohen, Hagit, Richter‐Levin, Gal·2006·Hippocampus

Abstract

The level of controllability has been shown to modulate the effects of stress on physiology and behavior. In the present study, we investigated the effects of controllable vs. uncontrollable stressors on plasticity in hippocampal CA1, the dentate gyrus (DG), and basal amygdala nucleus (B) in the rat, using the electrophysiological procedure of long‐term potentiation (LTP). A naive group was left undisturbed until the electrophysiological recording commenced. Rats of the two controllable stress groups were trained in the Morris water maze to locate an invisible underwater platform (the first group), or visible platform (the second group), thus escaping from the water, before the recording. The uncontrollable stress group underwent the same procedure (exposure time to water was adjusted to the averaged exposure time of the first controllable group) without the escape platform. We first assessed the effects of stress and controllability on LTP in CA1. Both controllable stressors and the uncontrollable stress impaired CA1 LTP, with a more robust effect induced by the uncontrollable stress. We further assessed the effects of the same procedures on LTP in DG and B. The uncontrollable stress enhanced LTP in DG and increased baseline responses (suggesting uncontrollable stress‐induced plasticity) in the amygdala. All the stressors decreased amygdalar LTP. An assessment of plasma levels of corticosterone (CORT), following the behavioral procedures, revealed an enhancement in CORT release following the uncontrollable, but not controllable stress, indicating the uncontrollable condition as the most stressful. These findings provide insight into the differential effects of stress and stress controllability on different hippocampal subregions and the amygdala. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hipo.20130

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kavushansky, A., Vouimba, R., Cohen, H., & Richter‐Levin, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Haifa (IL)
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Corresponding author
Richter‐Levin, Gal
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-09-30
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
35-42
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
OpenAlex
W2108079270
Cited by
141
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hippocampus (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
uncontrollable stress, hippocampal CA1, dentate gyrus, basal amygdala, long-term potentiation, synaptic plasticity, corticosterone, stress-induced plasticity, hippocampal subfields
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Animals, Corticosterone, Electrophysiology, Hippocampus, Neuronal Plasticity, Stress, Psychological, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Long-Term Potentiation, Maze Learning, Dentate Gyrus, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review