Lesions of the perirhinal cortex interfere with conditioned excitation but not with conditioned inhibition of fear.

Posttraining lesions of the perirhinal cortex (Prh) have been shown to interfere with the expression of fear. This study assessed whether Prh lesions would also disrupt the inhibition of fear as measured with conditioned inhibition of fear-potentiated startle. Following light + shock, noise→ light-no shock conditioned-inhibition training, rats were given Prh lesions. The lesions interfered with the expression of fear-potentiated startle to the light. To assess whether conditioned inhibition was affected, the rats were given light + retraining without additional noise→ light - training. The noise-conditioned inhibitor retained its ability to inhibit fear-potentiated startle to the retrained light. These results suggest that the areas of the Prh that are essential for the initial expression of conditioned fear are not important for the expression of conditioned inhibition of fear. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Electrolytic lesions of the amygdala block acquisition and expression of fear-potentiated startle even with extensive training but do not prevent reacquisition.

Lesions of the amygdala have been shown to block the expression of fear-potentiated startle (increased acoustic startle in the presence of a cue previously paired with shock). In the present study, bilateral lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala given after extensive training totally blocked the expression of fear-potentiated startle but did not prevent reacquisition. In contrast, when the lesions were made before any training, the lesioned rats did not show potentiated startle even with extensive training. Thus, the central nucleus of the amygdala normally seems to be required for the initial acquisition and expression of potentiated startle regardless of the degree of learning. However, reacquisition of potentiated startle can occur without the central nucleus, which implies the presence of a secondary brain system that can compensate for the loss of the central nucleus of the amygdala under some circumstances. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Posttraining lesions of the amygdala interfere with fear-potentiated startle to both visual and auditory conditioned stimuli in C57BL/6J mice.

The fear-potentiated startle paradigm has been used with great success to examine conditioned fear in both rats and humans. The purpose of the present experiment was to extend the authors' previous findings and further validate the fear-potentiated startle paradigm in mice. In Experiments 1 and 2, C57BL/6J mice were given Pavlovian fear conditioning with either an auditory or a visual conditioned stimulus. Similar to data collected with rats, fear-potentiated startle was observed for both stimulus modalities. In Experiment 3, posttraining lesions of the amygdala disrupted fear-potentiated startle in both conditioned stimulus modalities. These data are consistent with amygdala lesion studies in rats and suggest that fear-potentiated startle in mice requires an intact amygdala. Together, these results extend the authors' previous results and provide the basis for using this well-understood behavioral paradigm for examining the molecular mechanisms of conditioned fear in transgenic and knockout mice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hyperexcitability: Exaggerated fear-potentiated startle produced by partial amygdala kindling.

The present study asked whether partial amygdala kindling would affect the expression of conditioned fear-potentiated startle. Rats were conditioned to be fearful of a light. They were then stimulated bilaterally in the amygdala or hippocampus on 2 consecutive days (partial kindling). Rats were tested 24 hr later for fear-potentiated startle. Amygdala-kindled rats had exaggerated fear-potentiated startle compared to sham-kindled rats. Hippocampus-kindled rats also displayed fear-potentiated startle. but no greater than that of sham-kindled rats. Partial amygdala kindling induced c-fos messenger RNA (mRNA) expression, a marker for neuronal activation, throughout the limbic and neocortices. In contrast, partial hippocampus kindling induced c-fos mRNA in the hippocampus only. The data suggest that kindled-induced hyperexcitability of the amygdala and limbic cortices produced exaggerated conditioned fear-potentiated startle. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Double dissociation between the involvement of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis and the central nucleus of the amygdala in startle increases produced by conditioned versus unconditioned fear

The amplitude of the acoustic startle response is reliably enhanced when elicited in the presence of bright light (light-enhanced startle) or in the presence of cues previously paired with shock (fear-potentiated startle). Light-enhanced startle appears to reflect an unconditioned response to an anxiogenic stimulus, whereas fear-potentiated startle reflects a conditioned response to a fear-eliciting stimulus. We examine the involvement of the basolateral nucleus of the amygdala, the central nucleus of the amygdala, and the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis in both phenomena. Immediately before light-enhanced or fear-potentiated startle testing, rats received intracranial infusions of the AMPA receptor antagonist 2, 3-dihydroxy-6-nitro-7-sulphamoylbenzo(F)-quinoxaline (3 microg) or PBS. Infusions into the central nucleus of the amygdala blocked fear-potentiated but not light-enhanced startle, and infusions into the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis blocked light-enhanced but not fear-potentiated startle. Infusions into the basolateral amygdala disrupted both phenomena. These findings indicate that the neuroanatomical substrates of fear-potentiated and light-enhanced startle, and perhaps more generally of conditioned and unconditioned fear, may be anatomically dissociated.     

Fear-potentiated startle in two strains of inbred mice.

The fear-potentiated startle paradigm has been used with great success to examine conditioned fear in both rats and humans. The purpose of this study was to examine fear-potentiated startle in inbred mice. One-month-old C57BL/6J (C57) and DBA/2J (DBA) mice were given tone?+?foot shock training trials. The amplitude of the acoustic startle reflex was measured in the presence and absence of the tone both before and after training. Both strains showed fear-potentiated startle after training as evidenced by larger startle amplitudes in the presence of the tone than in its absence. However, the magnitude of fear-potentiated startle was greater in DBA mice than in C57 mice. These results not only demonstrate fear-potentiated startle in mice for the first time but also suggest that fear-potentiated startle can be influenced by characteristics of the mouse strain. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evidence of contextual fear after lesions of the hippocampus: a disruption of freezing but not fear-potentiated startle

The roles of the dorsal hippocampus and the central nucleus of the amygdala in the expression of contextual fear were assessed using two measures of conditioned fear: freezing and fear-potentiated startle. A discriminable context conditioning paradigm was developed that demonstrated both conditioned freezing and fear-potentiated startle in a context paired previously with foot shock, relative to a context in which foot shock had never been presented. Post-training lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala completely blocked both contextual freezing and fear-potentiated startle. Post-training lesions of the dorsal hippocampus attenuated contextual freezing, consistent with previous reports in the literature; however, these same lesions had no effect on fear-potentiated startle, suggesting preserved contextual fear. These results suggest that lesions of the hippocampus disrupt the freezing response but not contextual fear itself.     

Involvement of NMDA receptors within the amygdala in short- versus long-term memory for fear conditioning as assessed with fear-potentiated startle.

Pretraining intra-amygdala infusions of the NMDA receptor antagonist, D,L-AP5, block fear-potentiated startle in rats tested 24+ hr after training. This may reflect a failure of either acquisition or retention. To evaluate these alternatives, rats were tested for fear-potentiated startle during fear conditioning (30 light-shock pairings [0.6 mA shock]), as well as 1–30 min and 48 hr after fear conditioning. Amygdala lesions abolishes fear-potentiated startle at all train-test intervals. Intra-amygdala AP5 infusions (25 nmol/side) abolished fear-potentiated startle during the long-term test and had partial effects at shorter train-test intervals. When the level of fear-potentiated startle during the short-term test was lowered to that of the 48-hr test (i.e., by training rats with a lower, 0.3 mA footshock), AP5 abolished fear-potentiated startle at each timepoint. Thus, amygdala NMDA receptors appear to participate in the initial acquisition of fear memories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Lack of a temporal gradient of retrograde amnesia following NMDA-induced lesions of the basolateral anygdala assessed with the fear-potentiated startle paradigm.

M. Kim and M. Davis (see record 1994-28571-001) previously reported that electrolytic lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala, made 6 or 30 days after training, complctcly blockcd the expression of fear potentiated startle in rats. The present study shows that excitotoxic lesions of the basolateral amygdala also block fear-potentiated startle and do so whether the lesions are made soon (i.e., 6 days) or long (i.e., 30 days) after training. The relevance of these findings to various theories of amygdala function is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Lesions of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis block sensitization of the acoustic startle reflex produced by repeated stress, but not fear-potentiated startle

1. The effects of lesions of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BST) on the acquisition of conditioned fear were examined. In Experiment 1, BST lesions did not block acquisition of fear-potentiated startle to an explicit visual conditioned stimulus (CS) over 20 days of training. However, BST lesions blocked a gradual elevation in baseline startle also seen over the course of training. 2. The gradual increase in baseline startle was replicated in Experiment 2 without the presence of an explicit CS, using unoperated subjects. Experiment 2 showed that the elevation was due to repetitive exposure to shock, because unshocked control subjects did not show any elevation over sessions. 3. In Experiment 3, lesions of the BST did not disrupt rapid sensitization of the startle reflex by footshock, showing that different neural substrates underlie sensitization of startle by acute and chronic exposure to footshock. 4. These data indicate that the BST, despite its anatomical continuity with the amygdala, is not critically involved in the acquisition of conditioned fear to an explicit CS. Nevertheless, the BST is involved in mediating a stress-induced elevation in the startle reflex. This suggests that the BST and the CeA, which constitute part of the "extended amygdala" have complementary roles in responses to stress.     

N-methyl-D-aspartate lesions of the lateral and basolateral nuclei of the amygdaloid block fear-potentiated startle and shock sensitization of startle.

Destroyed cell bodies in the lateral and basolateral amygdaloid nuclei by local infusion of N-methyl-{d}-aspartate. Adjacent areas, such as the central amygdaloid nucleus, were largely spared. Lesions were carried out before training and testing (Exp 1) or after training but before testing (Exp 2). In both cases, the lesions completely blocked fear-potentiated startle (increased acoustic startle in the presence of a light previously paired with footshock). They also blocked increased startle after a series of footshocks, provided they damaged the most anterior part of the basolateral nucleus. It is suggested that the lateral or basolateral amygdaloid nuclei (or both) relay visual information to the central amygdaloid nucleus, which is also critical for fear-potentiated startle. In addition, activation of the most anterior part of the basolateral nucleus may be critical for processing shock information during fear conditioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Lesions of the amygdala, but not of the cerebellum or red nucleus, block conditioned fear as measured with the potentiated startle paradigm.

In Exp I, 97 male Sprague-Dawley albino rats were given 10 light–shock pairings on 2 successive days. At 24–48 hrs following training, groups of Ss received bilateral transection of the cerebellar peduncles, bilateral lesions of the red nucleus (which receives most of the cerebellar efferents), or bilateral lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala. Controls were sham operated. At 3–4 days after surgery, Ss were tested for potentiated startle (PS [increased acoustic startle in the presence of the light previously paired with shock]). PS was blocked by lesions of the central nucleus of the amygdala but not by transection of the cerebellar peduncles or lesions of the red nucleus. Exp II, in which a visual prepulse test was used with 14 Ss, indicated that the blockade of PS observed in Ss with amygdala lesions could not be attributed to optic tract damage. Exp III, with 20 Ss, demonstrated that the absence of potentiation in Ss with amygdala lesions was not simply due to a lowered startle level ceiling, because these Ss could show increased startle with increased stimulus intensity and with administration of intraperitoneal strychnine, (0.75 mg/kg), a drug that increases startle. Results are consistent with the hypothesis that the amygdala is involved in fear conditioning. (64 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Fear-potentiated startle and electrically evoked startle mediated by synapses in rostrolateral midbrain.

Startle amplitudes are increased when acoustic startle responses are elicited in the presence of a stimulus that has previously been paired with shock. This "fear-potentiated" startle response appears to be mediated via the caudal ventral amygdalofugal pathway to the brainstem. Electrical stimulation of this pathway evokes unconditioned startlelike responses. Collision tests have shown that a monosynaptic connection from amygdala to midbrain mediates these responses. Collision tests here localize these synapses mediating electrically evoked startlelike responses to the rostrolateral midbrain in awake rats. To test whether rostrolateral midbrain synapses also mediate fear-potentiated startle, we lesioned cells in these sites with ibotenic acid. These lesions completely blocked fear potentiation of acoustic startle. These same lesions did not block potentiation of startle by d-amphetamine (6 mg/kg). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Fear conditioning to tone, but not to context, is attenuated by lesions of the insular cortex and posterior extension of the intralaminar complex in rats.

C. Shi and M. Davis (see record 1999-00012-009) recently reported that combined lesions of the posterior extension of the intralaminar complex (PINT) and caudal insular cortex (INS) block acquisition but not expression of fear-potentiated startle to discreet conditioned stimuli (CSs) and a footshock unconditioned stimulus (US) and proposed that PINT-INS projections to the amygdala constitute the essential US pathways involved in fear conditioning. The present study further tested this hypothesis by examining whether PINT-INS lesions block fear conditioning (as measured by freezing) to diffuse-context and discrete-tone CSs, and whether posttraining lesions with continued CS–US training result in extinction to the CSs. Posttraining lesions resulted in a selective attenuation of tone conditoning, but context conditioning was unaffected by pre-and posttraining lesions. These results do not support the view that the PINT-INS represent the essential US pathway in fear conditioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intra-amygdala infusion of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist AP5 blocks acquisition but not expression of fear-potentiated startle to an auditory conditioned stimulus.

The fear-potentiated startle paradigm, in which the amplitude of the startle reflex is enhanced in the presence of a stimulus previously paired with footshock, was used to measure aversive conditioning after intra-amygdala infusion of the competitive N-methyl-{d}-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist {dl}-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoic acid (AP5). Infusion of 2.5 μg/side AP5 immediately before 5 noise–footshock pairings on each of 2 consecutive days dose-dependently blocked acquisition or consolidation of auditory fear-potentiated startle, consistent with previous results obtained with a visual stimulus. Somatosensory or auditory transmission deficits do not appear to be induced by intra-amygdala AP5, because rats reacted normally to footshocks and showed reliable potentiated startle expression after pretesting AP5 infusion at a dose that blocked acquisition. Together with earlier reports, these data suggest that an NMDA-dependent process localized in or near the amygdala may be necessary for the acquisition of conditioned fear across different sensory modalities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Role of the hippocampus, the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, and the amygdala in the excitatory effect of corticotropin-releasing hormone on the acoustic startle reflex

Previously, we demonstrated that transection of the fimbria/fornix blocked the excitatory effect of corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) on startle (CRH-enhanced startle), suggesting that the hippocampus and its efferent target areas that communicate via the fimbria may be critically involved in CRH-enhanced startle. The bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) receives direct projections from the ventral hippocampus via the fimbria/fornix. Therefore, the role of the ventral hippocampus, the BNST, and the amygdala in CRH-enhanced startle was investigated. NMDA lesions of the BNST completely blocked CRH-enhanced startle, whereas chemical lesions of the ventral hippocampus and the amygdala failed to block CRH-enhanced startle. However, the same amygdala-lesioned animals showed a complete blockade of fear-potentiated startle, a conditioned fear response sensitive to manipulations of the amygdala. In contrast, BNST-lesioned rats had normal fear-potentiated startle. This indicates a double dissociation between the BNST and the amygdala in two different paradigms that enhance startle amplitude. Microinfusions of CRH into the BNST, but not into the ventral hippocampus, mimicked intracerebroventricular CRH effects. Furthermore, infusion of a CRH antagonist into the BNST blocked CRH-enhanced startle in a dose-dependent manner. Control studies showed that this blockade did not result from either leakage of the antagonist into the ventricular system or a local anesthetic effect caused by infusion of the antagonist into the BNST. The present studies strongly suggest that CRH in the CSF can activate the BNST, which could lead to activation of brainstem and hypothalamic BNST target areas involved in anxiety and stress responses.     

The amygdala is necessary for the expression of conditioned but not unconditioned analgesia.

Lesions of the basolateral region and central nucleus of the amygdala prevent conditioned analgesia (F. A. Helmstetter, 1992). In general, these regions of the amygdala are more critically involved in the expression of conditioned reactions to aversive events than in the mediation of unconditioned reactions. The impact of amygdala lesions on both conditioned and unconditioned analgesia was explored in Sprague-Dawley rats. The lesions completely prevented the expression of conditioned analgesia, but had no effect on unconditioned analgesia. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Pretraining Inactivation of the Caudal Pontine Reticular Nucleus Impairs the Acquisition of Conditioned Fear-Potentiated Startle to an Odor, but Not a Light.

Recent data from developing rats suggest that structures downstream from the amygdala are involved in the acquisition of conditioned fear-potentiated startle (FPS). The authors tested this idea in adult rats by temporarily inactivating the structure critical for FPS, the caudal pontine reticular nucleus (PnC), during fear conditioning. When the conditioned stimulus (CS) was an odor, rats displayed freezing, but not FPS, at test. This effect was not due to a decrease in footshock sensitivity. Further, no savings were evident on retraining. When the CS was a light, inactivation of the PnC had no effect on the acquisition of FPS. Thus, the PnC may be crucial for the acquisition of conditioned FPS to an odor, but not a light. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Neural systems involved in fear and anxiety measured with fear-potentiated startle.

A good deal is now known about the neural circuitry involved in how conditioned fear can augment a simple reflex (fear-potentiated startle). This involves visual or auditory as well as shock pathways that project via the thalamus and perirhinal or insular cortex to the basolateral amygdala (BLA). The BLA projects to the central (CeA) and medial (MeA) nuclei of the amygdala, which project indirectly to a particular part of the acoustic startle pathway in the brainstem. N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, as well as various intracellular cascades in the amygdala, are critical for fear learning, which is then mediated by glutamate acting in the CeA. Less predictable stimuli, such as a long-duration bright light or a fearful context, activate the BLA, which projects to the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST), which projects to the startle pathway much as the CeA does. The anxiogenic peptide corticotropin-releasing hormone increases startle by acting directly in the BNST. CeA-mediated behaviors may represent stimulus-specific fear, whereas BNST-mediated behaviors are more akin to anxiety. NMDA receptors are also involved in extinction of conditioned fear, and both extinction in rats and exposure-based psychotherapy in humans are facilitated by an NMDA-partial agonist called D-cycloserine. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)