Cited by 120Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsStress Responses and Cortisol

Effect of varied gestational stress on acquisition of spatial memory, hippocampal LTP and synaptic proteins in juvenile male rats

Yaka, Rami, Salomon, Shiri, Matzner, Henry, Weinstock, Marta·2007·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

Some but not other forms of prenatal stress have been shown to impair spatial memory in adult male offspring. It is not clear if this is because of the intensity of the stress, age of rats, or the way in which learning is assessed. We examined the effect of daily varied prenatal stress consisting of 30 min restraint, saline injections and 15 min forced swim on day 17-21 of gestation on spatial learning, synaptic plasticity and the expression of key proteins of the post synaptic density (PSD) in the hippocampus of males aged 4-5 weeks. Prenatal stress impaired spatial learning in the Morris water maze and induced a significant decrease in long-term potentiation (LTP) in hippocampal slices. There was no change in the paired pulse facilitation ratio but there was a significant reduction in the expression of the NR2B subunit of the glutamate type NMDA receptor and the GluR1 subunit of the AMPA receptor, both of which are important modulators of LTP. These changes were accompanied by a remarkable increase in the scaffolding protein PSD95, which interacts with the intracellular carboxy terminal domains of the NR2 subunits. The high levels of PSD95 may have contributed to the impairment of LTP by disrupting the clustering of NMDA receptors in CA1 synapses. The alteration by prenatal stress in the relative amounts of scaffolding proteins and those which compose glutamate receptors could explain the depression of LTP and impairment in the acquisition of spatial learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bbr.2007.01.018

Cites

49 of 49 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
Yaka, R., Salomon, S., Matzner, H., & Weinstock, M.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Corresponding author
Weinstock, Marta
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-04
Volume
179
Issue
1
Pages
126-132
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003772211
Cited by
120
References
49
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
prenatal stress, spatial learning, hippocampus, long-term potentiation, synaptic plasticity, postsynaptic density, PSD-95, NR2B subunit, glutamate receptors, restraint stress, forced swim test, Morris water maze
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Critical Period, Psychological, Cytoskeletal Proteins, Female, Hippocampus, Male, Neuronal Plasticity, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Random Allocation, Reaction Time, Spatial Behavior, Stress, Psychological, Synapses, Rats, Wistar, Receptors, Glutamate, Long-Term Potentiation, Maze Learning, 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