Cited by 27Memory and Neural MechanismsEpilepsy research and treatmentNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Rodent anxiety and kindling of the central amygdala and nucleus basalis

Adamec, Robert, Shallow, Tanya·2000·Physiology & Behavior

Abstract

We studied lasting behavioral effects of kindling of three parts of the central nucleus of the amygdala and the anterior nucleus basalis in the right hemisphere of male Wistar rats. Kindling lastingly changed two measures of anxiety in the elevated plus-maze. The nature of the change depended on the location of the kindled focus. Kindling of the posterior central nucleus decreased both open-arm exploration and frequency of risk assessment in the elevated plus-maze 1 week after the fourth stage 5 seizure. Kindling of the middle parts of the central nucleus was without behavioral effects. Kindling of the anterior central nucleus and the anterior nucleus basalis increased risk assessment, which was interpreted as an anxiolytic effect. Changes in risk assessment produced by kindling of the central nucleus were dependent on open-arm avoidance, whereas the effects of nucleus basalis kindling were independent of open-arm avoidance. Analysis of covariance and factor analysis support the view that control of risk assessment is by circuitry, which is independent of that which controls open-arm avoidance. Moreover, part of this circuitry appears to involve the anterior nucleus basalis. Changes in plus-maze behavior were independent of changes in exploration or activity in either the plus-maze or hole board. These findings add to a growing body of evidence that suggests that subtle differences in location of a kindled focus within the rat amygdala lead to different behavioral outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0031-9384(00)00250-x

Cites

63 of 63 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
Adamec, R., & Shallow, T.
Affiliations
Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
Corresponding author
Adamec, Robert
Venue
Physiology & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-07
Volume
70
Issue
1-2
Pages
177-187
ISSN
0031-9384 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088564035
Cited by
27
References
63
Citations by year
2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physiology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
kindling, anxiety, central amygdala, nucleus basalis of Meynert, elevated plus maze, risk assessment, anxiolytic effects, amygdala subnuclei, rats
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Animals, Anxiety, Basal Ganglia, Body Weight, Electrodes, Implanted, Exploratory Behavior, Handling, Psychological, Kindling, Neurologic, Male, Motor Activity, Stress, Psychological, Rats, Wistar, Rats

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