Cited by 1,745Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchStress Responses and Cortisol

The Amygdaloid Complex: Anatomy and Physiology

SAH, P., FABER, E. S. L., LOPEZ DE ARMENTIA, M., POWER, J.·2003·Physiological Reviews

Abstract

Sah, P., E. S. L. Faber, M. Lopez de Armentia, and J. Power. The Amygdaloid Complex: Anatomy and Physiology. Physiol Rev 83: 803–834, 2003; 10.1152/physrev.00002.2003.—A converging body of literature over the last 50 years has implicated the amygdala in assigning emotional significance or value to sensory information. In particular, the amygdala has been shown to be an essential component of the circuitry underlying fear-related responses. Disorders in the processing of fear-related information are likely to be the underlying cause of some anxiety disorders in humans such as posttraumatic stress. The amygdaloid complex is a group of more than 10 nuclei that are located in the midtemporal lobe. These nuclei can be distinguished both on cytoarchitectonic and connectional grounds. Anatomical tract tracing studies have shown that these nuclei have extensive intranuclear and internuclear connections. The afferent and efferent connections of the amygdala have also been mapped in detail, showing that the amygdaloid complex has extensive connections with cortical and subcortical regions. Analysis of fear conditioning in rats has suggested that long-term synaptic plasticity of inputs to the amygdala underlies the acquisition and perhaps storage of the fear memory. In agreement with this proposal, synaptic plasticity has been demonstrated at synapses in the amygdala in both in vitro and in vivo studies. In this review, we examine the anatomical and physiological substrates proposed to underlie amygdala function.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/physrev.00002.2003

Cites

315 of 315 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
SAH, P., FABER, E. S. L., LOPEZ DE ARMENTIA, M., & POWER, J.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Division of Neuroscience, John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
Venue
Physiological Reviews
Published
2003-07
Volume
83
Issue
3
Pages
803-834
ISSN
  • 0031-9333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1210
OpenAlex
W2075312117
Cited by
1,745
References
303
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 78 · 2024: 119 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 84 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 96 · 2018: 85 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 117 · 2015: 118 · 2014: 85 · 2013: 79 · 2012: 81
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physiological Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
amygdala, fear conditioning, fear memory, synaptic plasticity, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, afferent and efferent connections, cytoarchitecture
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Animals, Conditioning, Psychological, Fear, Humans, Neural Pathways, Neuronal Plasticity

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