The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.

Research on memory reconsolidation has relied heavily on the use of Pavlovian auditory cued-fear conditioning. Here, an auditory cue (CS) is paired with a footshock (US) and the CS is later able to evoke a freezing response when presented alone. Some treatments, when administered to conditioned subj...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jason W Payne, Devon Merza, Dave G Mumby
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2023-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287193
_version_ 1797299662404714496
author Jason W Payne
Devon Merza
Dave G Mumby
author_facet Jason W Payne
Devon Merza
Dave G Mumby
author_sort Jason W Payne
collection DOAJ
description Research on memory reconsolidation has relied heavily on the use of Pavlovian auditory cued-fear conditioning. Here, an auditory cue (CS) is paired with a footshock (US) and the CS is later able to evoke a freezing response when presented alone. Some treatments, when administered to conditioned subjects immediately following a CS-alone (memory reactivation) trial, can attenuate the freezing they display on subsequent CS-alone (test) trials, in the absence of the treatment. This reduction in conditioned freezing is usually taken as evidence that the treatment disrupts post-reactivation reconsolidation of the memory trace representing the pairing of CS and US. We suggest an alternative interpretation that may account, either in whole or in part, for the attenuated freezing. The standard reconsolidation protocol (SRP) for auditory fear-conditioning has a design feature that results in second-order conditioning of fear to the test context, as this context is paired with the fear-evoking CS on the reactivation trial. Since freezing during the CS on the test will reflect the compound influence of contextual-fear and cued-fear, a post-reactivation treatment might attenuate freezing on the test by disrupting consolidation of second-order contextual-fear conditioning, even if it has little or no effect on the stability of the original cued-fear memory. This experiment confirmed that rats tested according to the SRP, in which the reactivation and test trials occur in the same context, freeze more on the test trial than rats that receive the reactivation and test trials in different contexts. This confound could lead to false-positive evidence of disrupted reconsolidation if it is not avoided or minimized, which can be accomplished with a modified protocol.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T22:53:54Z
format Article
id doaj.art-fdffcdfa11bd4c98a269abd82b2c8a9f
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T22:53:54Z
publishDate 2023-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-fdffcdfa11bd4c98a269abd82b2c8a9f2024-02-23T05:31:38ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032023-01-01186e028719310.1371/journal.pone.0287193The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.Jason W PayneDevon MerzaDave G MumbyResearch on memory reconsolidation has relied heavily on the use of Pavlovian auditory cued-fear conditioning. Here, an auditory cue (CS) is paired with a footshock (US) and the CS is later able to evoke a freezing response when presented alone. Some treatments, when administered to conditioned subjects immediately following a CS-alone (memory reactivation) trial, can attenuate the freezing they display on subsequent CS-alone (test) trials, in the absence of the treatment. This reduction in conditioned freezing is usually taken as evidence that the treatment disrupts post-reactivation reconsolidation of the memory trace representing the pairing of CS and US. We suggest an alternative interpretation that may account, either in whole or in part, for the attenuated freezing. The standard reconsolidation protocol (SRP) for auditory fear-conditioning has a design feature that results in second-order conditioning of fear to the test context, as this context is paired with the fear-evoking CS on the reactivation trial. Since freezing during the CS on the test will reflect the compound influence of contextual-fear and cued-fear, a post-reactivation treatment might attenuate freezing on the test by disrupting consolidation of second-order contextual-fear conditioning, even if it has little or no effect on the stability of the original cued-fear memory. This experiment confirmed that rats tested according to the SRP, in which the reactivation and test trials occur in the same context, freeze more on the test trial than rats that receive the reactivation and test trials in different contexts. This confound could lead to false-positive evidence of disrupted reconsolidation if it is not avoided or minimized, which can be accomplished with a modified protocol.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287193
spellingShingle Jason W Payne
Devon Merza
Dave G Mumby
The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
PLoS ONE
title The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
title_full The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
title_fullStr The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
title_full_unstemmed The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
title_short The standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear-conditioning does not account for fear to the test context.
title_sort standard reconsolidation protocol for auditory fear conditioning does not account for fear to the test context
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287193
work_keys_str_mv AT jasonwpayne thestandardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext
AT devonmerza thestandardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext
AT davegmumby thestandardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext
AT jasonwpayne standardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext
AT devonmerza standardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext
AT davegmumby standardreconsolidationprotocolforauditoryfearconditioningdoesnotaccountforfeartothetestcontext