Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Mar 13;104(11):4642-6.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0611718104. Epub 2007 Mar 5.

Paradoxical influence of hippocampal neurogenesis on working memory

Affiliations

Paradoxical influence of hippocampal neurogenesis on working memory

Michael D Saxe et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. .

Abstract

To explore the function of adult hippocampal neurogenesis, we ablated cell proliferation by using two independent and complementary methods: (i) a focal hippocampal irradiation and (ii) an inducible and reversible genetic elimination of neural progenitor cells. Previous studies using these methods found a weakening of contextual fear conditioning but no change in spatial reference memory, suggesting a supportive role for neurogenesis in some, but not all, hippocampal-dependent memory tasks. In the present study, we examined hippocampal-dependent and -independent working memory using different radial maze tasks. Surprisingly, ablating neurogenesis caused an improvement of hippocampal-dependent working memory when repetitive information was presented in a single day. These findings suggest that adult-born cells in the dentate gyrus have different, and in some cases, opposite roles in distinct types of memory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement: E.R.K. declares a conflict of interest (such as defined by PNAS policy). E.R.K. is one of four founders of Memory Pharmaceuticals and is Chairman of its Scientific Advisory Board. Memory Pharmaceuticals is concerned with developing drugs for age-related memory loss. Some of these drugs are also potentially useful in depression and schizophrenia. E.R.K.'s own laboratory is not involved in developing these drugs. E.R.K. is also a consultant for BrainCells, Inc., which works on neurogenesis, an area in which he is not directly involved.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Two different methods eliminate hippocampal neurogenesis in adult mice. (A) Targeted exposure of the hippocampal region of the brain to x-rays using stereotaxic positioning of a lead shield. Behavioral testing began 3 months after treatment with three 5-gray x-ray doses. Representative images show doublecortin-positive cells in the dentate gyrus of sham-treated mice and a nearly complete ablation of neurogenesis after hippocampal irradiation. (B) GFAP-TK transgenic mice were treated with GCV through sequential implantation of two s.c. osmotic minipumps, 6 weeks apart. Doublecortin immunoreactivity was significantly reduced in transgenic mice, and the few remaining cells had almost no dendritic processes.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Performance of irradiated mice in two versions of the radial arm maze. (A) Number of errors in a HML/NI working memory task (n = 16 x-ray, 16 sham). Across-phase errors were scored, and no significant effect of irradiation was observed. (B) Score in an LML/HI task (n = 16 x-ray, 13 sham). The same two pairs of arms are used every day for every trial (HI). The number of correct choices was scored. No difference was found between groups during training, but x-ray mice showed enhanced performance when the delay increased to 30 and 50 sec (P = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively).
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Performance of irradiated mice in the LML/LI version of the radial arm maze. (A) Schematic diagram of the testing procedure for a single day. (B) Score in LML/LI task (n = 16 x-ray, 14 sham). Only one pair of arms is presented per trial, with six trials/day. Score is plotted as blocks (2 days). Irradiated mice again showed a delay-specific improvement in their performance compared with control subjects (P = 0.05 and 0.02 for 25 and 35 sec, respectively). The improvement was confirmed by using the same delay (35 sec) over 6 consecutive days (3 blocks; P = 0.001). (C) The significant difference in performance between x-ray and sham mice was due to delay-dependent differential processing of intertrial interference. Bar graph represents the average number of correct choices per trial with a delay of 15 (3 last blocks of training) or 35 sec. Each day, six different pairs of arms were presented pseudorandomly. For trials 1–4, four different pairs of arms were used. However, because the maze only has eight arms, the repetition of previously presented arms (interference) occurred during trials 5 and 6. X-ray mice showed a specific enhancement in performance as compared with sham during trials 5 and 6 (with interference; P < 0.0001), but not during trials 1–4 (without interference; P = 0.07) with a delay of 35 sec.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Difference in performance of GFAP-TK transgenic mice during and after GCV treatment in the LML/LI version of the radial arm maze. (A) Experimental timeline. Both control and transgenic mice were treated with GCV for 10 weeks before behavioral testing in the radial maze and retested after a 10-week recovery period. (B) The performance of transgenic mice on GCV (n = 14 GFAP-TK, 12 control) was normal at delays of 35 sec and below but was improved relative to control mice when the delay was 55, 75, and 135 sec (P = 0.039, 0.030, and 0.016, respectively). This effect was confirmed by using the same delay (75 sec) over 6 consecutive days (3 blocks; P = 0.021). After 10 weeks of recovery (GCV Off), performance in both groups of mice was equivalent at all delays. (C) In GCV On mice, the significant difference in performance between GFAP-TK and control mice was due to delay-dependent differential processing of intertrial interference. Bar graph represents the average number of correct choices per trial with a delay of 15 (3 last blocks of training) or 75 sec. Transgenic mice showed a specific enhancement in performance as compared with controls during trials 5 and 6 (with interference; P < 0.011) but not during trials 1–4 (without interference; P = 0.067) with a delay of 75 sec.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kempermann G. J Neurosci. 2002;22:635–638. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gould E, Tanapat P, Hastings NB, Shors TJ. Trends Cognit Sci. 1999;3:186–192. - PubMed
    1. Leuner B, Gould E, Shors TJ. Hippocampus. 2006;16:216–224. - PubMed
    1. Raber J, Rola R, LeFevour A, Morhardt D, Curley J, Mizumatsu S, VandenBerg SR, Fike JR. Radiat Res. 2004;162:39–47. - PubMed
    1. Shors TJ, Townsend DA, Zhao M, Kozorovitskiy Y, Gould E. Hippocampus. 2002;12:578–584. - PMC - PubMed