Memory: Can fearlessness come in a tiny package?
A molecule called microRNA-153 helps to prevent rats associating new environments with fear.
- Dartmouth College, United States
Contextual fear conditioning is a process that occurs when a painful or frightening stimulus happens within a specific context, and it can cause an individual to fear the context even when the stimulus is removed. In humans, it is thought that contextual fear conditioning can contribute to anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, so understanding how the brain forms “associative memories” that link a context to a traumatic event has been the subject of research for many years (Maren et al., 2013).
In rodents, we can study the neurobiological mechanisms responsible for the formation of such memories by pairing a painful stimulus with a new environment. If a rodent experiences an electrical shock after being placed in a new cage, it will associate that cage with the electrical shock. Thus, when the rodent is placed in the cage after this association has been established, it will become “frozen with fear” even if no shock is delivered.
Two regions of the brain – the amygdala and the hippocampus – have major roles in the formation of fear-associated memories. The experience of fear increases neuronal activity in several regions of the amygdala, and learning about a new environment increases activity in the hippocampus (Phillips and LeDoux, 1992). Stable associative memories are formed by changing the strength of the connections between neurons – called synapses – in these two regions.
To communicate across synapses, the presynaptic neuron releases neurotransmitters from membrane-enclosed compartments called vesicles in a process called exocytosis. The neurotransmitter molecules then travel across the synapse and bind to receptors on the surface of the postsynaptic neuron. The strength of the synapse can be changed by altering the ability of the presynaptic neuron to release neurotransmitters, or by altering the availability of the receptors on the postsynaptic neuron (Kessels and Malinow, 2009; Nicoll and Schmitz, 2005). Now, in eLife, Danesh Moazed of Harvard Medical School and colleagues – including Rebecca Mathew and Antonis Tatarakis as joint first authors – report that the synapses responsible for the formation of fear-associated memories are kept in check by a tiny molecule called microRNA-153 (Mathew et al., 2016).
MicroRNAs are short RNA molecules (Lee et al., 1993; Wightman et al., 1993) that interfere with the ability of messenger RNA molecules to encode proteins (Selbach et al., 2008). Mathew et al. – who are based at Harvard and a number of other institutes in the United States – identified a set of 21 microRNAs whose production is increased by fear conditioning in rats. In particular, they found that learning to associate fear with a new environment caused the expression of microRNA-153 to increase by a factor of approximately four in a part of the hippocampus called the dentate gyrus.
To determine whether microRNA-153 has a role in the formation of fear-associated memories Mathew et al. reduced its production in the hippocampus and performed fear conditioning experiments. They found that rats that were deficient in microRNA-153 froze more often in the cage where they had experienced an electrical shock. Thus, it appears that microRNA-153 decreases the formation of fear-associated memories.
To determine how microRNA-153 inhibits the formation of fear memories, Mathew et al. analyzed all of the genes that they had predicted would be regulated by fear-induced microRNAs. This sample included a large proportion of the genes involved in vesicle exocytosis, and microRNA-153 targeted a large number of these genes. Further investigation revealed that fear conditioning reduced the expression of the exocytosis-related genes, and microRNA-153 knockdown increased their expression.
Genes regulated by microRNA-153 (such as Snap25 and Pclo) control synaptic strength by regulating both presynaptic vesicle exocytosis and postsynaptic receptor trafficking (Jurado et al., 2013; Südhof, 2013). By demonstrating in vitro that manipulating the expression of microRNA-153 can also regulate these processes, Mathew et al. conclude that microRNA-153 counteracts the formation of associative memories during fear conditioning by decreasing the strength of synapses.
The results also lead to a number of new questions. Does microRNA-153 regulate the activity of the hippocampus more generally? And is microRNA-153 expression regulated in other brain regions, such as the amygdala, to modulate other aspects of fear?
It is also important to note that Mathew et al. found a total of 21 microRNAs whose production increased as a result of fear conditioning. Based on their sequence, these microRNAs are predicted to target genes involved in a number of processes: vesicle fusion, neuronal development, long-term potentiation, neurotransmission and synaptogenic adhesion. Thus, figuring out how these microRNAs influence memory formation is likely to involve a number of mechanisms that were not investigated by Mathew et al. Finally, as we gain insight into the roles that microRNAs play, it may be possible to leverage the properties of these tiny molecules to develop new treatments for anxiety and other disorders.
References
-
The contextual brain: implications for fear conditioning, extinction and psychopathologyNature Reviews Neuroscience 14:417–428.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3492
-
Synaptic plasticity at hippocampal mossy fibre synapsesNature Reviews Neuroscience 6:863–876.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1786
-
Differential contribution of amygdala and hippocampus to cued and contextual fear conditioningBehavioral Neuroscience 106:274–285.https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.106.2.274
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2017, Luikart
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 876
- views
-
- 104
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Memory: Can fearlessness come in a tiny package?
eLife 6:e24575.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24575
Further reading
-
- Cell Biology
Proliferating animal cells maintain a stable size distribution over generations despite fluctuations in cell growth and division size. Previously, we showed that cell size control involves both cell size checkpoints, which delay cell cycle progression in small cells, and size-dependent regulation of mass accumulation rates (Ginzberg et al., 2018). While we previously identified the p38 MAPK pathway as a key regulator of the mammalian cell size checkpoint (S. Liu et al., 2018), the mechanism of size-dependent growth rate regulation has remained elusive. Here, we quantified global rates of protein synthesis and degradation in cells of varying sizes, both under unperturbed conditions and in response to perturbations that trigger size-dependent compensatory growth slowdown. We found that protein synthesis rates scale proportionally with cell size across cell cycle stages and experimental conditions. In contrast, oversized cells that undergo compensatory growth slowdown exhibit a superlinear increase in proteasome-mediated protein degradation, with accelerated protein turnover per unit mass, suggesting activation of the proteasomal degradation pathway. Both nascent and long-lived proteins contribute to the elevated protein degradation during compensatory growth slowdown, with long-lived proteins playing a crucial role at the G1/S transition. Notably, large G1/S cells exhibit particularly high efficiency in protein degradation, surpassing that of similarly sized or larger cells in S and G2, coinciding with the timing of the most stringent size control in animal cells. These results collectively suggest that oversized cells reduce their growth efficiency by activating global proteasome-mediated protein degradation to promote cell size homeostasis.
-
- Cell Biology
- Physics of Living Systems
The regulation of cell physiology depends largely upon interactions of functionally distinct proteins and cellular components. These interactions may be transient or long-lived, but often affect protein motion. Measurement of protein dynamics within a cellular environment, particularly while perturbing protein function with small molecules, may enable dissection of key interactions and facilitate drug discovery; however, current approaches are limited by throughput with respect to data acquisition and analysis. As a result, studies using super-resolution imaging are typically drawing conclusions from tens of cells and a few experimental conditions tested. We addressed these limitations by developing a high-throughput single-molecule tracking (htSMT) platform for pharmacologic dissection of protein dynamics in living cells at an unprecedented scale (capable of imaging >106 cells/day and screening >104 compounds). We applied htSMT to measure the cellular dynamics of fluorescently tagged estrogen receptor (ER) and screened a diverse library to identify small molecules that perturbed ER function in real time. With this one experimental modality, we determined the potency, pathway selectivity, target engagement, and mechanism of action for identified hits. Kinetic htSMT experiments were capable of distinguishing between on-target and on-pathway modulators of ER signaling. Integrated pathway analysis recapitulated the network of known ER interaction partners and suggested potentially novel, kinase-mediated regulatory mechanisms. The sensitivity of htSMT revealed a new correlation between ER dynamics and the ability of ER antagonists to suppress cancer cell growth. Therefore, measuring protein motion at scale is a powerful method to investigate dynamic interactions among proteins and may facilitate the identification and characterization of novel therapeutics.
