Cited by 60Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudySmoking Behavior and CessationMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Hippocampal nAChRs mediate nicotine withdrawal-related learning deficits

Open access
Davis, Jennifer A., Gould, Thomas J.·2009·European Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Nicotine modulation of learning may contribute to its abuse liability. The role of hippocampal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in the effects of acute, chronic and withdrawal from chronic nicotine on learning was assessed via intrahippocampal drug infusion in mice. Acute dorsal hippocampal nicotine infusion enhanced contextual fear conditioning. Conversely, chronic intrahippocampal infusion of a matched dose had no effect, and withdrawal from chronic infusion impaired learning. Thus, hippocampal functional adaptation, evidenced by learning deficits during abstinence, occurs with the transition from acute to chronic nicotine exposure. To investigate which hippocampal nAChRs mediate these adaptations, C57BL/6, beta2 nAChR subunit knockout (KO), and wildtype (WT) mice treated chronically with systemic nicotine received intrahippocampal dihydro-beta-erythroidine (a high affinity nAChR antagonist). Intrahippocampal dihydro-beta-erythroidine precipitated learning deficits in all but the KO mice. Therefore, the action of nicotine at hippocampal beta2 nAChRs mediates adaptations in hippocampal function that underlie withdrawal deficits in contextual fear conditioning.

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.euroneuro.2009.02.003

Cites

80 of 80 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davis, J. A., & Gould, T. J.
Affiliations
Temple University (US)
Corresponding author
Gould, Thomas J.
Venue
European Neuropsychopharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-08
Volume
19
Issue
8
Pages
551-561
ISSN
0924-977X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2009923575
Cited by
60
References
76
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (F31DA021949, DA017949, R01DA017949, DA024787, DA021949, R01DA024787)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, beta2 nAChR, hippocampus, nicotine withdrawal, learning deficits, contextual fear conditioning, chronic nicotine exposure, dihydro-beta-erythroidine, functional adaptation
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Conditioning, Operant, Dihydro-beta-Erythroidine, Fear, Hippocampus, Learning Disabilities, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Microinjections, Nicotine, Receptors, Nicotinic, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Thalamus, Mice, Knockout, Nicotinic Agonists, Mice

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