Cited by 661Stress Responses and CortisolMemory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Maternal care and hippocampal plasticity: evidence for experience-dependent structural plasticity, altered synaptic functioning, and differential responsiveness to glucocorticoids and stress

Open access
Champagne, D. L., Bagot, R. C., van Hasselt, F., Ramakers, G., Meaney, M. J., de Kloet, E. R., Joels, M., Krugers, H.·2008·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Maternal licking and grooming (LG) in infancy influences stress responsiveness and cognitive performance in the offspring. We examined the effects of variation in the frequency of pup LG on morphological, electrophysiological, and behavioral aspects of hippocampal synaptic plasticity under basal and stress-like conditions. We found shorter dendritic branch length and lower spine density in CA1 cells from the adult offspring of low compared with high LG offspring. We also observed dramatic effects on long-term potentiation (LTP) depending on corticosterone treatment. Low LG offspring, in contrast to those of high LG mothers, displayed significantly impaired LTP under basal conditions but surprisingly a significantly enhanced LTP in response to high corticosterone in vitro. This enhanced plasticity under conditions that mimic those of a stressful event was apparent in vivo. Adult low LG offspring displayed enhanced memory relative to high LG offspring when tested in a hippocampal-dependent, contextual fear-conditioning paradigm. Hippocampal levels of glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid receptors were reduced in low compared with high LG offspring. Such effects, as well as the differences in dendritic morphology, likely contribute to LTP differences under resting conditions, as well as to the maternal effects on synaptic plasticity and behavior in response to elevated corticosterone levels. These results suggest that maternal effects may modulate optimal cognitive functioning in environments varying in demand in later life, with offspring of high and low LG mothers showing enhanced learning under contexts of low and high stress, respectively.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.0526-08.2008

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • The physiological and morphological changes induced by low-quality maternal care in rats enhance learning and memory under stressful conditions.

    “they actually enhance learning and memory processes under stressful conditions”

    From The Adaptive Calibration Model of stress responsivity (2011) · cites this paper as Champagne et al., 2008

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Champagne, D. L., Bagot, R. C., van Hasselt, F., Ramakers, G., Meaney, M. J., de Kloet, E. R., Joels, M., & Krugers, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Douglas Mental Health University Institute (CA)
  • Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience (NL)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2008-06-04
Volume
28
Issue
23
Pages
6037-6045
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2074810352
Cited by
661
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 54
FWCI
24.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • KNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • KNAW research portal (Royal Academy of Art and Sciences (KNAW)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen
  • Top Institute Pharma
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
hippocampal synaptic plasticity, dendritic spine density, long-term potentiation, corticosterone, glucocorticoid receptor, mineralocorticoid receptor, stress responsiveness, contextual fear conditioning, memory, maternal effects, offspring cognitive function
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Newborn, Female, Glucocorticoids, Hippocampus, Maternal Behavior, Neuronal Plasticity, Stress, Psychological, Synapses, Rats, Long-Evans, 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