Reconsolidation-induced rescue of a remote fear memory blocked by an early cortical inhibition: Involvement of the anterior cingulate cortex and the mediation by the thalamic nucleus reuniens.

Systems consolidation is a time-dependent reorganization process involving neocortical and hippocampal networks underlying memory storage and retrieval. The involvement of the hippocampus during acquisition is well described; however we know much less about the concomitant contribution of cortical activity levels to the formation of stable remote memories. Here, after a reversible pharmacological inhibition of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) during the acquisition of a contextual fear conditioning, retrieval of both recent and remote memories were impaired, an effect that was reverted by a single memory reactivation session 48 h after training, through a destabilization-dependent mechanism interpreted as reconsolidation, that restored the normal course of systems consolidation in order to rescue a remote memory. Next we have shown that the integrity of both the anterior cingulate cortex and the thalamic nucleus reuniens (RE) were required for this reactivation-induced memory rescue. Because lidocaine infused into the RE inhibited LTP induction in the CA1-anterior cingulate cortex pathways, it seems that RE is a necessary component of the circuit underlying systems consolidation, mediating communication between dorsal hippocampus and cortical areas. To our notice, this is the first demonstration of the rescue of remote memories disrupted by ACC inhibition during acquisition, via a reconsolidation-driven mechanism. We have also shown the importance of RE to ensure the interconnection among brain areas that collectively seem to control the natural course of systems consolidation and allow the persistence of relevant emotional engrams. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The dynamic nature of systems consolidation: Stress during learning as a switch guiding the rate of the hippocampal dependency and memory quality.

Memory fades over time, becoming more schematic or abstract. The loss of contextual detail in memory may reflect a time-dependent change in the brain structures supporting memory. It has been well established that contextual fear memory relies on the hippocampus for expression shortly after learning, but it becomes hippocampus-independent at a later time point, a process called systems consolidation. This time-dependent process correlates with the loss of memory precision. Here, we investigated whether training intensity predicts the gradual decay of hippocampal dependency to retrieve memory, and the quality of the contextual memory representation over time. We have found that training intensity modulates the progressive decay of hippocampal dependency and memory precision. Strong training intensity accelerates systems consolidation and memory generalization in a remarkable timeframe match. The mechanisms underpinning such process are triggered by glucocorticoid and noradrenaline released during training. These results suggest that the stress levels during emotional learning act as a switch, determining the fate of memory quality. Moderate stress will create a detailed memory, whereas a highly stressful training will develop a generic gist-like memory.

Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature.

BACKGROUND: Preprint usage is growing rapidly in the life sciences; however, questions remain on the relative quality of preprints when compared to published articles. An objective dimension of quality that is readily measurable is completeness of reporting, as transparency can improve the reader's ability to independently interpret data and reproduce findings. METHODS: In this observational study, we initially compared independent samples of articles published in bioRxiv and in PubMed-indexed journals in 2016 using a quality of reporting questionnaire. After that, we performed paired comparisons between preprints from bioRxiv to their own peer-reviewed versions in journals. RESULTS: Peer-reviewed articles had, on average, higher quality of reporting than preprints, although the difference was small, with absolute differences of 5.0% [95% CI 1.4, 8.6] and 4.7% [95% CI 2.4, 7.0] of reported items in the independent samples and paired sample comparison, respectively. There were larger differences favoring peer-reviewed articles in subjective ratings of how clearly titles and abstracts presented the main findings and how easy it was to locate relevant reporting information. Changes in reporting from preprints to peer-reviewed versions did not correlate with the impact factor of the publication venue or with the time lag from bioRxiv to journal publication. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that, on average, publication in a peer-reviewed journal is associated with improvement in quality of reporting. They also show that quality of reporting in preprints in the life sciences is within a similar range as that of peer-reviewed articles, albeit slightly lower on average, supporting the idea that preprints should be considered valid scientific contributions.