Homosynaptic and heterosynaptic LTP protocols produce lasting memory when applied within minutes after a non-associative conditioning.
a) Diagram showing the experimental timelines for fiber photometry from thalamic inputs (Th) expressing GCaMP7s. b) Averaged trace of the thalamic input activity in response to footshock (onset indicated by the dotted line), n=5. c) Diagram showing the experimental timelines for fiber photometry from the lateral amygdala (LA) neurons expressing GCaMP8m with intact or lesioned thalamic inputs. d) Averaged trace of the LA neurons activity in response to footshock (onset indicated by the dotted line) in mice with lesion (dash line) or no lesion (solid line) in the lateral thalamus (Th), n=6 per group. e) Diagram showing the experimental timelines of the homosynaptic LTP protocol manipulation following an unpaired thalamic conditioning. f) Unpaired conditioning on the thalamic inputs (UTh, corresponding to panel e, top branch) produced no CS-evoked freezing, while if unpaired conditioning was immediately followed by high frequency stimulation (HFS) on the same inputs (UTh+HFSTh, corresponding to panel e, bottom branch) it significantly increased the CS-evoked freezing (homosynaptic LTP), (n=11 per group; Mann-Whitney test, p-value=0.0002). Subscripts with blue font indicate stimulation of the blue-shifted channelrhodopsin oChIEF using the selective procedure. g) Diagram showing the experimental timelines of the heterosynaptic LTP protocol manipulation following an unpaired thalamic conditioning. h) High frequency stimulation (HFS) of the thalamic input expressing red-shifted channelrhodopsin ChrimsonR immediately following an unpaired conditioning on the same input (UTh+HFSTh, corresponding to panel g, top branch) was ineffective in producing the CS-evoked freezing, while the same protocol in mice that, in addition, expressed oChIEF in the cortical inputs (UTh+HFSCtx, corresponding to panel g, bottom branch), significantly increased the CS-evoked freezing (heterosynaptic LTP) n=11 per group; Mann-Whitney test, p-value=0.0002). During HFS, blue light pulses overlapped with long pulses of yellow light. This co-illumination prevents the activation of ChrimsonR-expressing thalamic inputs (Th) by blue light, while the oChIEF-expressing cortical inputs remain unaffected. Note that yellow light specifically renders ChrimsonR, and not oChIEF, insensitive to blue light. Subscripts with red font and blue font indicate stimulation of the red-shifted channelrhodopsin ChrimsonR and the blue-shifted channelrhodopsin oChIEF, respectively. i) Diagram showing the experimental setup of the in vivo electrophysiology recordings (Rec) in anesthetized mice where the thalamic input expressing ChrimsonR and/or cortical input expressing oChIEF were optically activated independently. j) Left: Plot of average in vivo field EPSP slope (normalized to baseline period) in LA evoked by optical activation of thalamic inputs, before and after footshock delivery (n=5; Paired t-test, p-value=0.2916). Middle: Plot of average in vivo field EPSP slope (normalized to baseline period) in LA evoked by optical activation of cortical inputs (Ctx), before and after high frequency stimulation (HFS) of these inputs (n=6; Paired t-test, p-value=0.0031). Right: Plot of average in vivo field EPSP slope (normalized to baseline period) in LA evoked by optical activation of thalamic inputs (Th), before and after HFS delivery on the cortical inputs (heterosynaptic LTP) (n=5; Paired t-test, p-value=0.0074). HFS with yellow upperline indicates that the delivery of high frequency stimulation with blue light overlapped with long pulses of yellow light. This co-illumination prevents the activation of ChrimsonR-expressing thalamic inputs (Th) by blue light,, while the oChIEF-expressing cortical inputs remain unaffected. Superimposed traces of in vivo field response to single optical stimulus before (dash line) and after (solid line) the induced protocols. Results are reported as mean ±S.E.M. **, p<0.01; ***, p<0.001.