Cited by 65Memory and Neural MechanismsNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Nicotine enhances both foreground and background contextual fear conditioning

Open access
Davis, Jennifer A., Porter, Jessica, Gould, Thomas J.·2006·Neuroscience Letters

Abstract

The present study examined if nicotine enhances contextual fear conditioning when the training context is either a background stimulus or a foreground stimulus. In the background conditioning experiment, mice were trained using two auditory conditioned stimulus (CS; 30 s, 85 dB white noise)-footshock unconditioned stimulus (US; 2 s, 0.57 mA) pairings and tested 24 h later. In the foreground conditioning experiment, mice were trained with two presentations of a footshock US (2 s, 0.57 mA) and tested 24 h later. Mice received 0.09 mg/kg nicotine before training and testing. For both the foreground and background conditioning experiments, nicotine enhanced contextual conditioning. No enhancement of the auditory CS-US association was seen. These results demonstrate that nicotine enhances contextual fear conditioning regardless of whether the context is a background stimulus or a foreground stimulus during 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.neulet.2005.10.026

Cites

28 of 28 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., Porter, J., & Gould, T. J.
Affiliations
Temple University (US)
Corresponding author
Gould, Thomas J.
Venue
Neuroscience Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
394
Issue
3
Pages
202-205
ISSN
0304-3940 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1994014150
Cited by
65
References
28
Citations by year
2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA017949, T32DA07237)
  • Temple University
  • Pennsylvania Department of Health
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
nicotine, contextual fear conditioning, auditory conditioned stimulus, footshock, memory enhancement, mice
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Animals, Conditioning, Operant, Electroshock, Fear, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Nicotine, 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