Cited by 49Neuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyStress Responses and CortisolMemory and Neural Mechanisms

CRF1 and CRF2 Receptors are Required for Potentiated Startle to Contextual but not Discrete Cues

Open access
Risbrough, Victoria B, Geyer, Mark A, Hauger, Richard L, Coste, Sarah, Stenzel-Poore, Mary, Wurst, Wolfgang, Holsboer, Florian·2009·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) peptides and their receptors have crucial roles in behavioral and endocrine responses to stress. Dysregulation of CRF signaling has been linked to post-traumatic stress disorder, which is associated with increased startle reactivity in response to threat. Thus, understanding the mechanisms underlying CRF regulation of startle may identify pathways involved in this disorder. Here, we tested the hypothesis that both CRF1 and CRF2 receptors contribute to fear-induced increases in startle. Startle responses of wild type (WT) and mice with null mutations (knockout, KO) for CRF1 or CRF2 receptor genes were measured immediately after footshock (shock sensitization) or in the presence of cues previously associated with footshock (ie fear-potentiated startle, FPS). WT mice exhibited robust increases in startle immediately after footshock, which was dependent upon contextual cues. This effect was completely absent in CRF1 KO mice, and significantly attenuated in CRF2 KO mice. In contrast, CRF1 and CRF2 KO mice exhibited normal potentiation of startle by discrete conditioned cues. Blockade of both receptors via CRF1 receptor antagonist treatment in CRF2 KO mice also had no effect on FPS. These results support an additive model of CRF1 and CRF2 receptor activation effects on potentiated startle. These data also indicate that both CRF receptor subtypes contribute to contextual fear but are not required for discrete cued fear effects on startle reactivity. Thus, we suggest that either CRF1 or CRF2 could contribute to the increased startle observed in anxiety disorders with CRF system abnormalities.

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 · 10.1038/npp.2008.205

Cites

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?

  • Corticotropin-releasing factor receptors are preferentially involved in fear-potentiated startle to context but not to discrete fear conditioned stimuli.

    “recent findings from Risbrough et al (2009), as well as from our own laboratory (Walker et al, 2009), indicate a similar and, importantly, preferential involvement of CRF receptors in fear-potentiated startle to context but not discrete fear CSs.”
  • CRF2 knockout mice showed normal fear-potentiated startle to a discrete conditioned stimulus but some attenuation of context-potentiated startle.

    “CRF2 knockout mice also showed normal fear-potentiated startle to the discrete CS, but also some attenuation of context-potentiated startle.”
  • In CRF1 knockout mice, context-potentiated startle assessed immediately after conditioning was completely abolished, while fear-potentiated startle to a 30-second light/tone compound conditioned stimulus paired with footshock 24 hours earlier was normal.

    “CRF1 knockout mice showed a complete abolition of context-potentiated startle assessed immediately after conditioning, but normal fear-potentiated startle to a 30-s light/tone compound CS that had been paired with footshock 24 h earlier.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 66 · Cited by 49

Authors
Risbrough, V. B., Geyer, M. A., Hauger, R. L., Coste, S., Stenzel-Poore, M., Wurst, W., & Holsboer, F.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Helmholtz Munich (DE)
  • Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry (DE)
Corresponding author
Risbrough, Victoria B
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2008-11-19
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
1494-1503
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W2086075220
Cited by
49
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Neurocrine Biosciences
  • Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH074697, R01MH074697)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
corticotropin-releasing factor, CRF1 receptor, CRF2 receptor, fear-potentiated startle, contextual fear, startle reactivity, post-traumatic stress disorder, stress response, knockout mice, CRF receptor antagonists, anxiety disorders
MeSH terms
CRF Receptor, Type 1, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Conditioning, Psychological, Cues, Electroshock, Fear, Female, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Pyrimidines, Reflex, Startle, Receptors, Corticotropin-Releasing Hormone, Mice, Knockout, 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