Cited by 123Memory and Neural MechanismsNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudySmoking Behavior and Cessation

Nicotine enhances contextual fear conditioning in C57BL/6J mice at 1 and 7 days post-training

Gould, Thomas J., Stephen Higgins, J.·2003·Neurobiology of Learning and Memory

Abstract

Nicotine has been demonstrated to enhance learning processes. The present experiments extend these results to examine the effects of nicotine on acquisition and consolidation of contextual and cued fear conditioning, and the duration of nicotine's enhancement of conditioned fear. C57BL/6 mice were trained with two pairings of an auditory CS and a foot shock US. Multiple doses of nicotine were given before or immediately after training and on testing day (0.0, 0.050, 0.125, 0.250, and 0.375 mg/kg, i.p). Freezing to both the context and auditory CS was measured 24h after training and again 1 week after training. Mice did not receive nicotine for the 1-week retest. Nicotine (0.125 and 0.250 mg/kg) given on both training and testing days enhanced freezing to the context at 24h. In addition, elevated freezing to the context was seen 1 week post-training in mice previously treated with 0.125 and 0.250 mg/kg nicotine. Thus, nicotine-treated mice did show elevated levels of freezing when retested 1 week later, even though no nicotine was administered at the 1-week retest. Mice that received nicotine on training day or testing day only and mice that received nicotine with mecamylamine, a nicotinic receptor antagonist, were not different from saline-treated mice. In addition, post-training administration of nicotine did not enhance fear conditioning. The present results indicate that nicotine enhancement of contextual fear conditioning depends on administration of nicotine on training and test days but results in a long-lasting enhancement of memories of contextual fear conditioning that remains in the absence of nicotine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1074-7427(03)00057-1

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Gould, T. J., & Stephen Higgins, J.
Affiliations
Temple University (US)
Corresponding author
Gould, Thomas J.
Venue
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-09
Volume
80
Issue
2
Pages
147-157
ISSN
1074-7427 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2074624311
Cited by
123
References
90
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurobiology of Learning and Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
nicotine, contextual fear conditioning, cued fear conditioning, memory consolidation, long-term memory, mecamylamine, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, freezing behavior, C57BL/6 mice
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Conditioning, Psychological, Fear, Ganglionic Stimulants, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Nicotine, Teaching, 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