English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The roles of muscarinic and nicotinic cholinergic receptors in perirhinal cortex in object recognition memory were compared. Rats' discrimination of a novel object preference test (NOP) test was measured after either systemic or local infusion into the perirhinal cortex of the nicotinic receptor antagonist methyllycaconitine (MLA), which targets alpha-7 (α7) amongst other nicotinic receptors or the muscarinic receptor antagonists scopolamine, AFDX-384, and pirenzepine. Methyllycaconitine administered systemically or intraperirhinally before acquisition impaired recognition memory tested after a 24-h, but not a 20-min delay. In contrast, all three muscarinic antagonists produced a similar, unusual pattern of impairment with amnesia after a 20-min delay, but remembrance after a 24-h delay. Thus, the amnesic effects of nicotinic and muscarinic antagonism were doubly dissociated across the 20-min and 24-h delays. The same pattern of shorter-term but not longer-term memory impairment was found for scopolamine whether the object preference test was carried out in a square arena or a Y-maze and whether rats of the Dark Agouti or Lister-hooded strains were used. Coinfusion of MLA and either scopolamine or AFDX-384 produced an impairment profile matching that for MLA. Hence, the antagonists did not act additively when coadministered. These findings establish an important role in recognition memory for both nicotinic and muscarinic cholinergic receptors in perirhinal cortex, and provide a challenge to simple ideas about the role of cholinergic processes in recognition memory: The effects of muscarinic and nicotinic antagonism are neither independent nor additive.

Differing time dependencies of object recognition memory impairments produced by nicotinic and muscarinic cholinergic antagonism in perirhinal cortex