Non-linear susceptibility to interferences in declarative memory formation.

After encoding, memories go through a labile state followed by a stabilization process known as consolidation. Once consolidated they can enter a new labile state after the presentation of a reminder of the original memory, followed by a period of re-stabilization (reconsolidation). During these periods of lability the memory traces can be modified. Currently, some studies show a rapid stabilization after 30 min, while others show that stabilization occurs after longer periods (e.g. > 6 h). Here we investigate the effect of an interference treatment on declarative memory consolidation, comparing distinct time intervals after acquisition. On day 1, participants learned a list of non- syllable pairs (List 1). 5 min, 30 min, 3 h or 8 h later, they received an interference list (List 2) that acted as an amnesic agent. On day 2 (48 h after training) participants had to recall List 1 first, followed by List 2. We found that the List 1 memory was susceptible to interference when List 2 was administered 5 min or 3 h after learning but not when it was administered 30 min or 8 h after. We propose the possibility that this rapid memory protection could be induced by a fast and transient neocortical integration. Our results open a discussion about the contribution of molecular and systemic aspects to memory consolidation.

Memory reconsolidation as a tool to endure encoding deficits in elderly.

Normal aging involves changes in the ability to acquire, consolidate and recall new information. It has been recently proposed that the reconsolidation process is also affected in older adults. Reconsolidation is triggered after reminder presentation, allowing memories to be modified: they can be impaired, strengthened or changed in their content. In young adults it was previously shown that the presentation of repetitive reminders induces memory strengthening one day after reactivation and the presentation of at least one reminder increases memory persistence several days after reactivation. However, until now this process has remained elusive in older adults. We hypothesize that older adults need a stronger reminder to induce memory strengthening through the reconsolidation process than young adults. To test this, we perform a three-day experiment. On day 1, participants learned 15 sound-word associations, on day 2 they received no reminders (NR group), one reminder (R group) or two rounds of reactivations (Rx2 group). Finally, they were tested on day 7. We found that, contrary to our hypothesis, older adults show a memory improvement triggered by repeated labilization/reconsolidation processes to an equal extent than young adults. These results open new perspectives into the use of reconsolidation to improve daily acquired information and the development of therapeutic home used tools to produce memory enhancement in healthy older adults or those with cognitive decline.

Sleep accelerates re-stabilization of human declarative memories.

Consolidated memories can return to a labile state upon presentation of a reminder, followed by a period of re-stabilization known as reconsolidation. This period can take several hours, and if an amnesic agent (e.g. new learning) is administered inside the time window of reconsolidation (when the memory is still labile) the memory is impaired, whereas the memory remains unaffected if the amnesic agent is administered outside this time window. Sleep plays a fundamental role in the consolidation and integration of new memories, and recently sleep has also been implicated in memory reconsolidation. Here, we studied the role of sleep in accelerating the reconsolidation time window. On day 1, participants learned a list of syllable-pairs (List 1). On day 2, they received a reminder, followed by interference learning (List 2) administered either after 90 min of wakefulness, after 90 min of sleep, or after 10 h of wakefulness. On day 3, participants had to recall List 1 first, followed by List 2, and we assessed the Retrieval-Induced-Forgetting Effect (RIF) on List 2 as a measure of List 1 memory stability. We found that the 90 min sleep group showed an intact RIF effect similar to the 10 h wake group, reflecting stable List 1 memory after 90 min of sleep and after 10 h of wakefulness. However, the RIF effect was absent after 90 min of wakefulness, suggesting that the List 1 memory was still labile at that time. Moreover, the RIF effect in the 90 min sleep group was associated with power density in the slow oscillation frequency band (0.5-1 Hz) during SWS and S2. These findings suggest that 90 min of sleep accelerate memory re-stabilization after reminder presentation, shortening the reconsolidation time window and protecting the memory against subsequent interference. This rapid memory re-stabilization may depend on slow oscillation activity during NREM sleep.

The role of GABAA in the expression of updated information through the reconsolidation process in humans.

Consolidated memory can be again destabilized by the presentation of a memory cue (reminder) of the previously acquired information. During this process of labilization/restabilization memory traces can be either impaired, strengthened or updated in content. Here, we study if a consolidated memory can be updated by linking one original cue to two different outcomes and whether this process was modulated by the GABAergic system. To aim that, we designed two experiments carried out in three consecutive days. All participants learned a list of non-sense syllable pairs on day 1. On day 2 the new information was introduced after the reminder or no-reminder presentation. Participants were tested on day 3 for the updated or original list (Exp. 1). In Exp. 2 we tested whether this new information was incorporated by an inhibitory process mediated by the GABAergic system. For that, participants retrieved the original information before being taken Clonazepam 0.25mg (GABAA agonist) or Placebo pill. We found that the groups that received the reminder correctly recalled the old and new information. However, the no reminder groups only correctly recalled the original information. Furthermore, when testing occurred in the presence of Clonazepam, the group that received the reminder plus the new information showed an impaired original memory performance compared to the group that received only Clonazepam (without reminder) or the reminder plus Placebo pill. These results show that new information can be added to a reactivated declarative memory in humans by linking one cue to two different outcomes. Furthermore, we shed light on the mechanisms of memory updating being the GABAergic system involved in the modulation of the old and new information expression.