Premium
Retroactive interference of object‐in‐context long‐term memory: Role of dorsal hippocampus and medial prefrontal cortex
Author(s) -
Martínez María Cecilia,
Villar María Eugenia,
Ballarini Fabricio,
Viola Haydée
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
hippocampus
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.767
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1098-1063
pISSN - 1050-9631
DOI - 10.1002/hipo.22328
Subject(s) - interference theory , neuroscience , psychology , muscimol , hippocampus , context (archaeology) , prefrontal cortex , memory consolidation , long term memory , object (grammar) , amnesia , cognitive psychology , working memory , cognition , computer science , artificial intelligence , chemistry , biology , agonist , paleontology , biochemistry , receptor
Retroactive interference (RI) is a type of amnesia in which a new learning experience can impair the expression of a previous one. It has been studied in several types of memories for over a century. Here, we aimed to study in the long‐term memory (LTM) formation of an object‐in‐context task, defined as the recognition of a familiar object in a context different to that in which it was previously encountered. We trained rats with two sample trials, each taking place in a different context in association with different objects. Test sessions were performed 24 h later, to evaluate LTM for both object‐context pairs using separate groups of trained rats. Furthermore, given the involvement of hippocampus (Hp) and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) in several recognition memories, we also analyzed the participation of these structures in the LTM formation of this task by the local infusion of muscimol. Our results show that object‐in‐context LTM formation is sensitive to RI by a different either familiar or novel object‐context pair trial, experienced 1 h later. This interference occurs in a restricted temporal window and works on the LTM consolidation phase, leaving intact short‐term memory expression. The second sample trial did not affect the object recognition part of the memory. Besides, muscimol treatment before the second sample trial blocks its object‐in‐context LTM and restores the first sample trial memory. We hypothesized that LTM‐RI amnesia is probably caused by resources or cellular machinery competition in these brain regions when they are engaged in memory formation of the traces. In sum, when two different object‐in‐context memory traces are being processed, the second trace interferes with the consolidation of the first one requiring mPFC and CA1 dorsal Hp activation. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.