GluN1 and GluN2A NMDA Receptor Subunits Increase in the Hippocampus during Memory Consolidation in the Rat.

It is widely accepted that NMDA receptors (NMDAR) are required for learning and memory formation, and for synaptic plasticity induction. We have previously shown that hippocampal GluN1 and GluN2A NMDAR subunits significantly increased following habituation of rats to an open field (OF), while GluN2B remained unchanged. Similar results were obtained after CA1-long-term potentiation (LTP) induction in rat hippocampal slices. Other studies have also shown NMDAR up regulation at earlier and later time points after LTP induction or learning acquisition. In this work, we have studied NMDAR subunits levels in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex (PFC) after OF habituation and after object recognition (OR), to find out whether rising of NMDAR subunits is a general and structure-specific feature during memory formation. In 1, 2 and 3 month old rats there was an increase in hippocampal GluN1 and GluN2A, but not in GluN2B levels 70 min after OF habituation. This rise overlaps with early phase of memory consolidation, suggesting a putative relationship between them. The increases fell down to control levels 90 min after training. Similar results were obtained in the hippocampus of adult rats 70 min after OR training, without changes in PFC. Following OF test or OR discrimination phase, NMDAR subunits remained unchanged. Hence, rising of hippocampal GluN1 and GluN2A appears to be a general feature after novel "spatial/discrimination" memory acquisition. To start investigating the dynamics and possible mechanisms of these changes, we have studied hippocampal neuron cultures stimulated by KCl to induce plasticity. GluN1 and GluN2A increased both in dendrites and neuronal bodies, reaching a maximum 75 min later and returning to control levels at 90 min. Translation and/or transcription and mobilization differentially contribute to this rise in subunits in bodies and dendrites. Our results showed that the NMDAR subunits increase follows a similar time course both in vitro and in vivo. These changes happen in the hippocampus where a spatial representation of the environment is being formed making possible short term and long term memories (STM and LTM); appear to be structure-specific; are preserved along life; and could be related to synaptic tagging and/or to memory consolidation of new spatial/discrimination information.

Amnesia of inhibitory avoidance by scopolamine is overcome by previous open-field exposure.

The muscarinic cholinergic receptor (MAChR) blockade with scopolamine either extended or restricted to the hippocampus, before or after training in inhibitory avoidance (IA) caused anterograde or retrograde amnesia, respectively, in the rat, because there was no long-term memory (LTM) expression. Adult Wistar rats previously exposed to one or two open-field (OF) sessions of 3 min each (habituated), behaved as control animals after a weak though over-threshold training in IA. However, after OF exposure, IA LTM was formed and expressed in spite of an extensive or restricted to the hippocampus MAChR blockade. It was reported that during and after OF exposure and reexposure there was an increase in both hippocampal and cortical ACh release that would contribute to "prime the substrate," e.g., by lowering the synaptic threshold for plasticity, leading to LTM consolidation. In the frame of the "synaptic tagging and capture" hypothesis, plasticity-related proteins synthesized during/after the previous OF could facilitate synaptic plasticity for IA in the same structure. However, IA anterograde amnesia by hippocampal protein synthesis inhibition with anisomycin was also prevented by two OF exposures, strongly suggesting that there would be alternative interpretations for the role of protein synthesis in memory formation and that another structure could also be involved in this "OF effect."

Hippocampal NMDA receptors and the previous experience effect on memory.

N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDAR) are thought to be responsible for switching synaptic activity specific patterns into long-term changes in synaptic function and structure, which would support learning and memory. Hippocampal NMDAR blockade impairs memory consolidation in rodents, while NMDAR stimulation improves it. Adult rats that explored twice an open field (OF) before a weak though overthreshold training in inhibitory avoidance (IA), expressed IA long-term memory in spite of the hippocampal administration of MK-801, which currently leads to amnesia. Those processes would involve different NMDARs. The selective blockade of hippocampal GluN2B-containing NMDAR with ifenprodil after training promoted memory in an IA task when the training was weak, suggesting that this receptor negatively modulates consolidation. In vivo, after 1h of an OF exposure-with habituation to the environment-, there was an increase in GluN1 and GluN2A subunits in the rat hippocampus, without significant changes in GluN2B. Coincidentally, in vitro, in both rat hippocampal slices and neuron cultures there was an increase in GluN2A-NMDARs surface expression at 30min; an increase in GluN1 and GluN2A levels at about 1h after LTP induction was also shown. We hypothesize that those changes in NMDAR composition could be involved in the "anti-amnesic effect" of the previous OF. Along certain time interval, an increase in GluN1 and GluN2A would lead to an increase in synaptic NMDARs, facilitating synaptic plasticity and memory; while then, an increase in GluN2A/GluN2B ratio could protect the synapse and the already established plasticity, perhaps saving the specific trace.

NMDA receptor subunits in the adult rat hippocampus undergo similar changes after 5 minutes in an open field and after LTP induction.

NMDA receptor subunits change during development and their synaptic expression is modified rapidly after synaptic plasticity induction in hippocampal slices. However, there is scarce information on subunits expression after synaptic plasticity induction or memory acquisition, particularly in adults. GluN1, GluN2A and GluN2B NMDA receptor subunits were assessed by western blot in 1) adult rats that had explored an open field (OF) for 5 minutes, a time sufficient to induce habituation, 2) mature rat hippocampal neuron cultures depolarized by KCl and 3) hippocampal slices from adult rats where long term potentiation (LTP) was induced by theta-burst stimulation (TBS). GluN1 and GluN2A, though not GluN2B, were significantly higher 70 minutes--but not 30 minutes--after a 5 minutes session in an OF. GluN1 and GluN2A total immunofluorescence and puncta in neurites increased in cultures, as evaluated 70 minutes after KCl stimulation. Similar changes were found in hippocampal slices 70 minutes after LTP induction. To start to explore underlying mechanisms, hippocampal slices were treated either with cycloheximide (a translation inhibitor) or actinomycin D (a transcription inhibitor) during electrophysiological assays. It was corroborated that translation was necessary for LTP induction and expression. The rise in GluN1 depends on transcription and translation, while the increase in GluN2A appears to mainly depend on translation, though a contribution of some remaining transcriptional activity during actinomycin D treatment could not be rouled out. LTP effective induction was required for the subunits to increase. Although in the three models same subunits suffered modifications in the same direction, within an apparently similar temporal course, further investigation is required to reveal if they are related processes and to find out whether they are causally related with synaptic plasticity, learning and memory.

A novel dihydro-pyrazolo(3,4d)(1,2,4)triazolo(1,5a)pyrimidin-4-one (AJ23) is an antagonist at adenosine A(1) receptors and enhances consolidation of step-down avoidance.

Adenosine A(1) receptor antagonists are of potential value in the treatment of cognitive dysfunction. We have developed compound AJ23 (7-methyl-1-phenyl-1,8-dihydro-pyrazolo-(3,4d)(1,2,4)-triazolo(1,5a)-pyrimidin-4-one) as a novel, non-xanthine based antagonist at A(1) receptors. It has micromolar affinity at human A(1) receptors with a 45-fold selectivity for A(1) over A(2A) receptors and little affinity for many other receptors and transporters tested in a screening panel. AJ23 blocks A(1) receptors in the rat hippocampus, increasing the baseline size of excitatory post-synaptic potentials and blocking the inhibitory effects of adenosine. When administered directly into the rodent hippocampus this compound improves consolidation in a step-down avoidance learning task. The results suggest that AJ23 or derivatives may represent possible leads for further chemical development towards a chemically novel group of antagonists at A(1) receptors with potential value as cognitive enhancers.

Memory impairment in rats by hippocampal administration of the serine protease subtilisin.

Since the serine protease subtilisin has been reported to generate a novel form of long-term depression (LTD) in rat hippocampal slices, the present work was designed to determine whether it has any effect on learning and memory processes. Rats were used to examine the effects of subtilisin, injected directly into the dorsal hippocampus, on task performance in a step-through inhibitory avoidance of a mild footshock. The administration of 100 ng of subtilisin into each hippocampus, immediately after training, was sufficient to induce a detectable learning deficit with a footshock stimulus of 0.5 mA. Higher doses produced dose-related impairments in memory consolidation. These effects were not the result of irreversible toxicity, since rats trained with a higher amplitude footshock (0.75 mA) were able to perform as control animals; therefore, the amnesic effect was not further evident. Furthermore, the administration of subtilisin before avoidance training did not produce any detectable effect on performance during the training or test sessions, indicating that neither acquisition nor consolidation was affected. It is concluded that the post-training administration of a serine protease inhibitor is able to produce robust deficits of memory consolidation consistent with its ability to generate LTD, raising the possibility that related molecules could play physiological or pathological roles in the modulation of learning and memory.