Cited by 161Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsProtein Kinase Regulation and GTPase Signaling

CaMKII "Autonomy" Is Required for Initiating But Not for Maintaining Neuronal Long-Term Information Storage

Open access
Buard, I., Coultrap, S. J., Freund, R. K., Lee, Y.-S., Dell'Acqua, M. L., Silva, A. J., Bayer, K. U.·2010·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Ca(2+)/calmodulin (CaM)-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII) "autonomy" (T286-autophosphorylation-induced Ca(2+)-independent activity) is required for long-term potentiation (LTP) and for learning and memory, as demonstrated by CaMKII T286A mutant mice. The >20-year-old hypothesis that CaMKII stimulation is required for LTP induction, while CaMKII autonomy is required for LTP maintenance was recently supported using the cell-penetrating fusion-peptide inhibitor antCN27. However, we demonstrate here that ant/penetratin fusion to CN27 compromised CaMKII-selectivity, by enhancing a previously unnoticed direct binding of CaM to ant/penetratin. In contrast to antCN27, the improved cell-penetrating inhibitor tatCN21 (5 mum) showed neither CaM binding nor inhibition of basal synaptic transmission. In vitro, tatCN21 inhibited stimulated and autonomous CaMKII activity with equal potency. In rat hippocampal slices, tatCN21 inhibited LTP induction, but not LTP maintenance. Correspondingly, tatCN21 also inhibited learning, but not memory storage or retrieval in a mouse in vivo model. Thus, CaMKII autonomy provides a short-term molecular memory that is important in the signal computation leading to memory formation, but is not required as long-term memory store.

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.1469-10.2010

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Numerous studies using peptide inhibitors have confirmed the block of LTP.

    “Numerous studies using peptide inhibitors have confirmed the block of LTP (200–203).”

    From Synaptic memory and CaMKII (2023) · cites this paper as [202]

  • Pharmacological inhibition of CaMKII activity has generally been reported not to affect synaptic responses.

    “In addition, pharmacological inhibition of CaMKII activity has generally been reported not to affect synaptic responses (198, 200–203, 357, 358).”

    From Synaptic memory and CaMKII (2023) · cites this paper as [202]

  • Numerous previous studies have failed to reverse established LTP.

    “However, numerous previous studies have failed to reverse established LTP (Refs. 198, 200–203, but see Ref. 357).”

    From Synaptic memory and CaMKII (2023) · cites this paper as [202]

  • Concentrations of CaMKII inhibitors that block the induction of LTP failed to affect maintenance.

    “Third, as discussed in sect. 8, concentrations of CaMKII inhibitors that block the induction of LTP failed to affect maintenance (Refs. 198, 200–203, but see Ref. 357).”

    From Synaptic memory and CaMKII (2023) · cites this paper as [202]

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
Buard, I., Coultrap, S. J., Freund, R. K., Lee, Y.-S., Dell'Acqua, M. L., Silva, A. J., & Bayer, K. U.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2010-06-16
Volume
30
Issue
24
Pages
8214-8220
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2028360365
Cited by
160
References
61
Citations by year
2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
6.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • University of Colorado Denver
  • National Institute on Aging (R37AG013622)
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA046934)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P30NS048154, R01NS040701, R01NS052644)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Kinase Regulation and GTPase Signaling
Keywords
long-term potentiation, LTP maintenance, learning and memory, calmodulin binding, hippocampus, synaptic transmission
MeSH terms
Benzenesulfonamides, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Benzylamines, Carrier Proteins, Conditioning, Classical, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Electric Stimulation, Hippocampus, Male, Memory, Neural Inhibition, Neurons, Peptide Fragments, Phosphorylation, Recombinant Fusion Proteins, Sulfonamides, Viral Fusion Proteins, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Long-Term Potentiation, Patch-Clamp Techniques, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Mice, Rats, Calcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2, Cell-Penetrating Peptides, 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.

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