Cited by 258

Deficits in trace fear memory and long-term potentiation in a mouse model for fragile X syndrome

Zhao, Ming-Gao, Toyoda, Hiroki, Ko, Shanelle W., Ding, Hoi-Ki, Wu, Long-Jun, Zhuo, Min·2005·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Trace fear memory requires the activity of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and is sensitive to attention-distracting stimuli. Fragile X syndrome is the most common form of mental retardation with many patients exhibiting attention deficits. Previous studies in fragile X mental retardation 1 ( FMR1 ) knock-out (KO) mice, a mouse model for fragile X, focused mainly on hippocampal-dependent plasticity and spatial memory. We demonstrate that FMR1 knock-out mice show a defect in trace fear memory without changes in locomotion, anxiety, and pain sensitivity. Whole-cell path-clamp recordings in the ACC show that long-term potentiation (LTP) was completely abolished. A similar decrease in LTP was found in the lateral amygdala, another structure implicated in fear memory. No significant changes were found in basal synaptic transmission. This suggests that synaptic plasticity in the ACC and amygdala of FMR1 KO mice plays an important role in the expression of behavioral phenotypes similar to the symptoms of fragile X syndrome.

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.1520-05.2005

Cites

9 of 9 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?

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
Zhao, M.-G., Toyoda, H., Ko, S. W., Ding, H.-K., Wu, L.-J., & Zhuo, M.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2005-08-10
Volume
25
Issue
32
Pages
7385-7392
ISSN
  • 0270-6474
  • 1529-2401
Cited by
258
References
9
Language
en

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