Cited by 153Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory Processes and Influences

Blocking synaptic removal of GluA2-containing AMPA receptors prevents the natural forgetting of long-term memories

Open access
Migues, Paola Virginia, Liu, Lidong, Archbold, Georgina E. B., Einarsson, Einar Ö., Wong, Jacinda, Bonasia, Kyra, Ko, Seung Hyun, Wang, Yu Tian +1 more·2016·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

The neurobiological processes underpinning the natural forgetting of long-term memories are poorly understood. Based on the critical role of GluA2-containing AMPA receptors (GluA2/AMPARs) in long-term memory persistence, we tested in rats whether their synaptic removal underpins time-dependent memory loss. We found that blocking GluA2/AMPAR removal with the interference peptides GluA23Y or G2CT in the dorsal hippocampus during a memory retention interval prevented the normal forgetting of established, long-term object location memories, but did not affect their acquisition. The same intervention also preserved associative memories of food-reward conditioned place preference that would otherwise be lost over time. We then explored whether this forgetting process could play a part in behavioral phenomena involving time-dependent memory change. We found that infusing GluA23Y into the dorsal hippocampus during a 2 week retention interval blocked generalization of contextual fear expression, whereas infusing it into the infralimbic cortex after extinction of auditory fear prevented spontaneous recovery of the conditioned response. Exploring possible physiological mechanisms that could be involved in this form of memory decay, we found that bath application of GluA23Y prevented depotentiation, but not induction of long-term potentiation, in a hippocampal slice preparation. Together, these findings suggest that a decay-like forgetting process that involves the synaptic removal of GluA2/AMPARs erases consolidated long-term memories in the hippocampus and other brain structures over time. This well regulated forgetting process may critically contribute to establishing adaptive behavior, whereas its dysregulation could promote the decline of memory and cognition in neuropathological disorders. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The neurobiological mechanisms involved in the natural forgetting of long-term memory and its possible functions are not fully understood. Based on our previous work describing the role of GluA2-containing AMPA receptors in memory maintenance, here, we tested their role in forgetting of long-term memory. We found that blocking their synaptic removal after long-term memory formation extended the natural lifetime of several forms of memory. In the hippocampus, it preserved spatial memories and inhibited contextual fear generalization; in the infralimbic cortex, it blocked the spontaneous recovery of extinguished fear. These findings suggest that a constitutive decay-like forgetting process erases long-term memories over time, which, depending on the memory removed, may critically contribute to developing adaptive behavioral responses.

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.3333-15.2016

Cites

63 of 63 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Pavlov I (1927) Conditioned reflexes. Oxford: OUP.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Migues, P. V., Liu, L., Archbold, G. E. B., Einarsson, E. Ö., Wong, J., Bonasia, K., Ko, S. H., Wang, Y. T., & Hardt, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2016-03-23
Volume
36
Issue
12
Pages
3481-3494
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2304552143
Cited by
153
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9
FWCI
12.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
forgetting, object location memory, conditioned place preference, fear extinction, spontaneous recovery, depotentiation, long-term potentiation, hippocampus, infralimbic cortex, memory decay
MeSH terms
Animals, Male, Neuronal Plasticity, Mental Recall, Reward, Stereotyped Behavior, Synapses, Receptors, AMPA, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats, Memory, Long-Term

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