Intra-amygdala anxiogenic drug infusion prior to retrieval biases rats towards the use of habit memory.
Abstract
In a dual-solution plus-maze task that can be acquired using either hippocampus-dependent "cognitive/place" learning or dorsal striatal-dependent "habit/response" learning, pre-acquisition peripheral or intra-basolateral amygdala (BLA) injections of anxiogenic drugs result in the predominant use of response learning. The present experiments examined the effect of anxiogenic drug treatment on the relative use of multiple memory systems when administered prior to memory retrieval. Adult male Long-Evans rats were trained for two days (6 trials/day, 30s ITI) in a dual-solution plus-maze task to swim from the same start point (south) to an escape platform that was located in a consistent goal arm (west). On day three, prior to a memory retrieval probe trial from a novel start point (north), rats received a peripheral (0.03, 0.1 or 0.3 mg/kg), or intra-BLA (0.1 microg/0.5 microl) injection of the anxiogenic alpha(2)-adrenoreceptor antagonist RS 79948-197, or saline. Relative to saline controls, rats receiving either peripheral or intra-BLA infusions of RS 79948-197 predominantly displayed response learning on the probe trial. In an additional experiment peripheral (0.1 mg/kg) or intra-BLA (0.1 microg) drug injections administered prior to both acquisition and retrieval also resulted in the predominant use of response learning. The findings indicate that (1) similar to acquisition, peripheral injection of an anxiogenic drug prior to memory retrieval biases rats towards the use of habit/response memory, (2) intra-BLA infusions of an anxiogenic drug is sufficient to produce this modulatory effect of emotional state on memory retrieval, and (3) state-dependency does not appear to play a role in the effects of anxiogenic drug treatment on multiple memory system use. The findings may have implications for understanding the interaction between brain function, emotion, and the relative use of multiple memory systems in human psychopathology.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The types of tasks impaired by stress are those requiring prefrontal cortex operations, whereas engrained habits relying on basal ganglia circuits are spared or enhanced.
“We now understand that the types of tasks that were impaired by stress were those that required PFC operations13, whereas engrained habits that rely on basal ganglia circuits were spared or enhanced14.”
From Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function (2009) · cites this paper as [14]
More severe acute stressors impair hippocampal functions but continue to strengthen emotional associations and motor habits carried out by the amygdala and striatum.
“More severe acute stressors impair hippocampal functions38 but continue to strengthen the emotional associations and motor habits carried out by the amygdala and striatum, respectively14,39.”
From Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function (2009) · cites this paper as [14]
Tasks that rely on the habitual functions of basal ganglia circuits or the emotional conditioning of the amygdala are spared or even enhanced by stress exposure.
“Later research in animals demonstrated that exposure to acute, uncontrollable stress impairs the working memory abilities of the PFC19,20, while tasks that rely on the habitual functions of basal ganglia circuits, for example20,21, or the emotional conditioning of the amygdala22 are spared or even enhanced by stress exposure (Fig. 1b).”
From Stress weakens prefrontal networks: molecular insults to higher cognition (2015) · cites this paper as [21]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 66 · Cited by 84
- Authors
- Elliott, A. E., & Packard, M. G.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Packard, Mark G.
- Venue
- Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-11
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 616-623
- ISSN
- 1074-7427 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1994181427
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 1.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neurobiology of Learning and Memory (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- anxiogenic drugs, basolateral amygdala, memory retrieval, habit learning, response learning, hippocampal-dependent memory, state dependence
- MeSH terms
- Amygdala, Animals, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Infusions, Intravenous, Isoquinolines, Learning, Male, Memory, Naphthyridines, Pentobarbital, Swimming, Receptors, Adrenergic, alpha-2, Anesthetics, General, Maze Learning, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats, Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Antagonists
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