Cited by 192Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsNeural dynamics and brain function

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 54 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Synaptic evidence for the efficacy of spaced learning

Open access

Abstract

The superiority of spaced vs. massed training is a fundamental feature of learning. Here, we describe unanticipated timing rules for the production of long-term potentiation (LTP) in adult rat hippocampal slices that can account for one temporal segment of the spaced trials phenomenon. Successive bouts of naturalistic theta burst stimulation of field CA1 afferents markedly enhanced previously saturated LTP if spaced apart by 1 h or longer, but were without effect when shorter intervals were used. Analyses of F-actin-enriched spines to identify potentiated synapses indicated that the added LTP obtained with delayed theta trains involved recruitment of synapses that were “missed” by the first stimulation bout. Single spine glutamate-uncaging experiments confirmed that less than half of the spines in adult hippocampus are primed to undergo plasticity under baseline conditions, suggesting that intrinsic variability among individual synapses imposes a repetitive presentation requirement for maximizing the percentage of potentiated connections. We propose that a combination of local diffusion from initially modified spines coupled with much later membrane insertion events dictate that the repetitions be widely spaced. Thus, the synaptic mechanisms described here provide a neurobiological explanation for one component of a poorly understood, ubiquitous aspect of learning.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In adult rat hippocampal slices, a second theta burst stimulation delivered 60 min or more after the first produced additional LTP, whereas shorter delays did not, and this added potentiation recruited synapses missed by the first train. The findings suggest intrinsic spine threshold differences plus delayed membrane insertion events impose a spacing requirement that may explain one temporal component of distributed practice.

Key findings

  • TBS2 at 10 or 30 min after TBS1 caused short-term but not additional long-term facilitation; at 60 min it doubled potentiation, and 90 min gave the same degree of LTP as 60 min. A third train at 60 min again increased potentiation, whereas a fourth and fifth had no effect.
  • F-actin labeling showed TBS2 doubled the population of densely F-actin-positive spines above TBS1 alone; in GFP–phalloidin experiments, TBS1 left about 10% of spines with high F-actin versus 18% after TBS2 (P < 0.04), and the percentage of 5-μm dendritic segments with two or more labeled spines doubled after TBS2 (P < 0.005).
  • Single-spine glutamate uncaging enlarged only ∼40% of targeted adult spines, compared with >80% of young spines (P < 0.005); adult spines that enlarged were refractory to successive induction even when uncaging events were separated by more than 1 h.
  • Brefeldin A applied after TBS1 blocked additional LTP by TBS2 and caused LTP1 to decay; the ampakine CX614 increased LTP1 and substantially reduced LTP2.

Methods

  • Acute hippocampal slices from young adult male Sprague–Dawley rats or C57BL/6 mice; Schaffer–commissural afferents in field CA1b were stimulated with TBS consisting of 10 bursts of 4 pulses at 100 Hz separated by 200 ms, with baseline/test responses at 3 pulses/min. Brefeldin A and CX614 were bath-applied at 20 μM.
  • F-actin was imaged with Alexa Fluor 568–phalloidin and GFP-expressing mice using confocal microscopy; single-spine glutamate uncaging used two-photon imaging/uncaging in eGFP mice (2–3 or 8–10 wk), MNI-caged L-glutamate, and a >50% spine volume change threshold.
  • Electrophysiology data are group means ± SEM with two-tailed Student t tests unless otherwise noted, significance at P < 0.05; spine volume statistics used t tests, one-way ANOVA, and repeated-measures ANOVA in SPSS and Excel.

Limitations

  • Stated: the paper calls for future research on whether transcriptional mechanisms interact with the synapse-specific processes described, on longer intervals (days, weeks), and on unknown cell biological variables; the mechanism of the late priming step remains unresolved.
  • Stated: brefeldin after TBS1 unexpectedly caused LTP1 to decay, and predicted AMPA receptor insertion would increase EPSPs at 30–60 min after TBS1, which was not observed, requiring alternative explanations.
  • Evident: the findings are from acute hippocampal slices rather than behavioral learning or memory tests, and the uncaging experiments do not state the sex of the mice used.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1120700109

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 54 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 57 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 21
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 14
32 of 32
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The priming effect of TBS1 on nonresponsive spines occurs at a stage located between the transmitter receptors and the multiple steps leading to the assembly and stabilization of actin filaments.

    “We, therefore, assume that the priming effect of TBS1 on nonresponsive spines occurs at a stage located between the transmitter receptors and the multiple steps leading to the assembly and stabilization of actin filaments.”
1 of 1

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • CREB study described as involving mice is cited as a Drosophila study

    Minor

    The discussion describes references 31 and 32 as studies of memory defects in mice, but reference 32 explicitly concerns Drosophila.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 49 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–191 of 191

Metadata

Authors
Kramár, E. A., Babayan, A. H., Gavin, C. F., Cox, C. D., Jafari, M., Gall, C. M., Rumbaugh, G., & Lynch, G.
Affiliations
  • Departments of aAnatomy and Neurobiology and
  • Scripps Research Institute (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2012-03-12
Volume
109
Issue
13
Pages
5121-5126
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1998698062
Cited by
192
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 4
FWCI
5.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH083346)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P01NS045260, NS045260, R01NS064079, NS064079)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
spaced learning, massed training, long-term potentiation, theta burst stimulation, hippocampal CA1, synaptic plasticity, glutamate uncaging, synaptic variability, membrane insertion
MeSH terms
Actins, Animals, Learning, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Synaptic Transmission, Synapses, Theta Rhythm, Time Factors, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Long-Term Potentiation, Dendritic Spines, Mice, Rats, Polymerization, In Vitro Techniques

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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