Cited by 625Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Prefrontal control of fear: more than just extinction

Open access
Sotres-Bayon, Francisco, Quirk, Gregory J·2010·Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Abstract

Although fear research has largely focused on the amygdala, recent findings highlight cortical control of the amygdala in the service of fear regulation. In rodent models, it is becoming well established that the infralimbic (IL) prefrontal cortex plays a key role in extinction learning, and recent findings are uncovering molecular mechanisms involved in extinction-related plasticity. Furthermore, mounting evidence implicates the prelimbic (PL) prefrontal cortex in the production of fear responses. Both IL and PL integrate inputs from the amygdala, as well as other structures to gate the expression of fear via projections to inhibitory or excitatory circuits within the amygdala. We suggest that dual control of the amygdala by separate prefrontal modules increases the flexibility of an organism's response to danger cues.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conb.2010.02.005

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • PL stimulation impairs fear extinction, and PL activity after extinction predicts reduced extinction recall, whereas IL activity has opposite effects.

    “For example, PL stimulation impairs fear extinction, and PL activity after extinction predicts reduced extinction recall [87], whereas IL activity has the opposite effects [87].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sotres-Bayon, F., & Quirk, G. J.
Affiliations
University of Puerto Rico, Medical Sciences Campus (PR)
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
231-235
ISSN
0959-4388 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141747781
Cited by
625
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 35
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurobiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5p50mh086400-05, 5r01mh081975-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P-50-MH-086400, R01-MH081975, R01MH058883)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
fear extinction, prefrontal cortex, infralimbic cortex, prelimbic cortex, amygdala, fear regulation, fear expression
MeSH terms
Affect, Amygdala, Animals, Association Learning, Behavior, Extinction, Psychological, Fear, Humans, Neural Pathways, Neuronal Plasticity, Prefrontal Cortex

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