Cited by 35Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Age-dependent enhancement of hippocampal long-term potentiation in knock-in mice expressing human apolipoprotein E4 instead of mouse apolipoprotein E.

Kitamura, Hiroyuki W., Hamanaka, Hiroki, Watanabe, Masahiko, Wada, Koji, Yamazaki, Chiharu, Fujita, Shinobu C., Manabe, Toshiya, Nukina, Nobuyuki·2004·Neuroscience Letters

Abstract

Human apolipoprotein E (apoE) comprises three isoforms, apoE2, apoE3 and apoE4, and apoE4 has been reported as a risk factor of Alzheimer's disease (AD). One of the clinical symptoms of AD is disorder of memory that has been suggested to be related with synaptic plasticity such as long-term potentiation (LTP). Here, we show the enhancement of hippocampal LTP at younger age in knock-in mice lacking mouse apoE, but instead expressing human apoE4. The enhancement of LTP in apoE4 knock-in mice is age-dependent, and it disappears in adult apoE4 knock-in mice. In apoE3 knock-in mice LTP is unaltered, thus human apoE4, but not apoE3, specifically modulates synaptic plasticity at younger age. Since basal synaptic transmission and distribution of glutamate receptors, as well as presynaptic functions, are intact in apoE4 knock-in mice, postsynaptic functional modification of LTP through lipid homeostasis is suggested. ApoE4 knock-in mice would be a useful animal model of human apoE4 carriers, and our finding that LTP is enhanced in younger apoE4 knock-in mice is in accord with the previous report showing higher intelligence in young human apoE4 carriers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neulet.2004.07.084

Cites

1 of 1 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
Kitamura, H. W., Hamanaka, H., Watanabe, M., Wada, K., Yamazaki, C., Fujita, S. C., Manabe, T., & Nukina, N.
Affiliations
  • RIKEN (JP)
  • Hokkaido University (JP)
  • Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo (JP)
Corresponding author
  • Manabe, Toshiya
  • Nukina, Nobuyuki
Venue
Neuroscience Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-10
Volume
369
Issue
3
Pages
173-178
ISSN
0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079428657
Cited by
35
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
APOE ε4, apolipoprotein E isoforms, long-term potentiation, hippocampus, synaptic plasticity, Alzheimer's disease risk, lipid homeostasis, postsynaptic function, memory
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Apolipoproteins E, Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Electric Stimulation, Hippocampus, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mice, Mutant Strains, Synaptic Transmission, 2-Amino-5-phosphonovalerate, Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate, Long-Term Potentiation, Receptors, AMPA, Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists, 6-Cyano-7-nitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Mice, Apolipoprotein E4, In Vitro Techniques

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