Report

Fear Erasure in Mice Requires Synergy Between Antidepressant Drugs and Extinction Training

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  23 Dec 2011:
Vol. 334, Issue 6063, pp. 1731-1734
DOI: 10.1126/science.1214592

You are currently viewing the figures only.

View Full Text

Log in to view the full text

Log in through your institution

Log in through your institution

This article has a correction. Please see:

  1. Fig. 1

    Chronic Flx treatment before fear conditioning leads to fear erasure when combined with extinction training. (A) Flx treatment started 3 weeks before and continued throughout the experiment. (B) Control and Flx groups (n = 31 to 34 mice per group) exhibited similar levels of fear acquisition (extinction day 1, first block of 2 CS) and extinction (extinction day 2, last block of 2 CS). One week later (n = 21 per group) only control group showed spontaneous recovery and fear renewal. In the fear renewal test, the Flx-extinction group froze less than either control-extinction or Flx–no-extinction group (NoExt, n = 5). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001. Error bars indicate mean ± SEM.

  2. Fig. 2

    Extinction training is effective in combination with chronic Flx treatment after fear conditioning. (A) After fear conditioning and 2 weeks of Flx treatment, mice were subjected to fear renewal (protocol I) or fear reinstatement (protocol II). 5 US indicates five unsignaled foot shocks. (B) Fear renewal: Control and Flx groups (n = 10 per group) exhibited similar levels of fear acquisition and extinction. One week later, only control group showed elevated spontaneous recovery and significant fear renewal. The Flx-extinction group froze less than either control-extinction or Flx–no-extinction groups (NoExt, n = 7). (C) Fear reinstatement: Although both groups exhibited increased levels of freezing when compared with the extinguished levels, the Flx group showed lower levels of fear reinstatement (P < 0.05). N = 8 per group. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. Error bars indicate mean ± SEM.

  3. Fig. 3

    Flx treatment enhances plasticity in the fear memory circuitry. (A) Representative PNNs and parvalbumin (PV) immunostaining in the BLA. Arrows, double-positive neurons. (B to D) Chronic Flx decreased the percentage of PNN-containing neurons with parvalbumin (B), increased PSA-NCAM expression (C), and decreased KCC2 levels (D) in the fear circuit. N = 6 per group. (E) Input-output function for fEPSPs in LA evoked by EC stimulation. Flx treatment increased the average amplitude of fEPSPs above control levels. N = 12 to 15 per group. (F) Effect of high-frequency stimulation (two 1-s stimuli at 100 Hz) of EC afferents on LA fEPSPs. In control animals, EC tetanization caused short-term synaptic potentiation, but there was no potentiation at 1 hour; conversely, in fluoxetine-treated animals tetanization resulted in LTP at 1 hour. N = 8 per group. Inset shows example traces before and 1 hour after tetanization. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 versus respective control group. Error bars indicate mean ± SEM.

  4. Fig. 4

    BDNF regulates fear memory erasure. (A) Chronic Flx after fear conditioning increased the BDNF exon-1 and total BDNF mRNA levels in the BLA and BDNF exon-1 level in the hippocampus (HIP) but not in the prefrontal cortex (mPFC). N = 6 to 8 per group. (B) Flx prevented fear renewal in BDNF+/+ mice (see protocol I, Fig. 2A) but failed to erase fearful memory in BDNF+/− mice. N = 10 or 11 per group. (C) BDNF-virus experiment: After successful fear acquisition and extinction, doxycycline treatment was terminated to induce BDNF overexpression in amygdala, which resulted in a significant reduction in freezing level in the fear renewal test. N = 6 or 7 per group. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 versus control groups. Error bars indicate means ± SEM.

Stay Connected to Science