Cited by 57Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory Processes and Influences

Phthalic Acid Amygdalopetal Lesion of the Nucleus Basalis Magnocellularis Induces Reversible Memory Deficits in Rats

Power, Ann E, McGaugh, James L·2002·Neurobiology of Learning and Memory

Abstract

The basolateral amygdala (BLA) is extensively implicated in emotional learning and memory. The current study investigated the contribution of cholinergic afferents to the BLA from the nucleus basalis magnocellularis in influencing aversive learning and memory. Sprague-Dawley rats were given permanent unilateral phthalic acid (300 ng) lesions of the nucleus basalis magnocellularis and were chronically implanted with cannulas aimed at the ipsilateral BLA. Lesioned rats showed a pronounced inhibitory avoidance task retention deficit that was attenuated by acute posttraining infusions of the muscarinic cholinergic agonist oxotremorine (4 ng) or the indirect agonist physostigmine (1 microg) into the BLA. Continuous multiple-trial inhibitory avoidance training and testing revealed that lesioned rats have a mild acquisition deficit, requiring approximately 1 additional shock to reach the criterion, and a pronounced consolidation deficit as indicated by a shorter latency to enter the shock compartment on the retention test. Because lesioned rats did not differ from sham-operated controls in performance on a spatial water maze task or in shock sensitivity, it is not likely that the memory impairments produced by the phthalic acid lesions are due to any general sensory or motor deficits. These findings suggest that the dense cholinergic projection from the nucleus basalis magnocellularis to the BLA is involved in both the acquisition and the consolidation of the aversive inhibitory avoidance task.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/nlme.2001.4030

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Power, A. E., & McGaugh, J. L.
Affiliations
University of California, Irvine (US)
Venue
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-05
Volume
77
Issue
3
Pages
372-388
ISSN
1074-7427 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1976294207
Cited by
57
References
74
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurobiology of Learning and Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH12526)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
nucleus basalis magnocellularis, basolateral amygdala, cholinergic afferents, muscarinic receptors, passive avoidance, aversive learning, memory consolidation, memory acquisition, memory retention, oxotremorine, physostigmine
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Animals, Male, Memory Disorders, Phthalic Acids, Spatial Behavior, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Maze Learning, Basal Nucleus of Meynert, 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