Fig. 5: PVT regulates safety learning through modulation of PL SOM-INs. | Neuropsychopharmacology

Fig. 5: PVT regulates safety learning through modulation of PL SOM-INs.

From: Modulation of learning safety signals by acute stress: paraventricular thalamus and prefrontal inhibition

Fig. 5

A Schematic of injection of GCaMP6 virus in PL of SOM-Cre mice and location of injection site. Scale bar: 500 μm. B Freezing during CS- and CS+ retrieval (left) and discrimination between CS- and CS+ (right) 24 h post-FC and post-SL (two-way ANOVA, interaction, F(1, 20) = 15.57, P < 0.001, stimulus, F(1,20) = 29.36, P < 0.0001, treatment, F(2,10) = 1.267, P = 0.2736; N = 6 mice, CS-(post FC)vs. CS-(post SL), P < 0.01, CS+ (post FC) vs. CS+ (post SL), P = 0.1163, CS-(post FC) vs. CS+ (post FC), P = 0.5242, CS-(post SL) vs. CS+ (post SL), P < 0.0001, Bonferroni’s post-test; two-tailed paired t-test, t = 6.224, df = 5; N = 6 mice, Post FC vs. Post SL, P < 0.01). C Averaged Ca2+ responses (upper) and heat maps (lower) in SOM-INs during CS− and CS+ after FC (two-tailed paired t-test, t = 0.4700, df = 5; N = 6 mice, CS- vs. CS+, P = 0.6581). D Averaged Ca2+ responses (upper) and heat maps (lower) in SOM-INs during CS− and CS+ post SL (two-tailed paired t-test, t = 3.043, df = 5; N = 6 mice, CS- vs. CS+, P < 0.05). E Schematics of injections of ChR2 or eYFP control virus in PL in SOM-Cre mice (left) and experimental procedure (right). F Freezing levels (left, PL-SOM-CHR2: (two-way ANOVA, interaction, F(2,15) = 10.67, P < 0.01, stimulus, F(1,15) = 399.0, P < 0.0001, treatment, F(2,15) = 10.97, P < 0.01; N = 6 mice, CS-(laser off)vs. CS-(laser on), P < 0.0001, CS-(laser on)vs.(laser off), P < 0.0001, Bonferroni’s post-test; PL-SOM-eYFP: two-way ANOVA, interaction, F(2,15) = 2.472, P = 0.1180, stimulus, F(1,15) = 257.8, P < 0.0001, treatment, F(2,15) = 0.08919, P = 0.9152; N = 6 mice, CS-(laser off) vs. CS-(laser on), P = 0.5883, CS-(laser on)vs.(laser off), P = 0.9913, Bonferroni’s post-test;) and discrimination index (PL-SOM-CHR2: one-way ANOVA, F(2,15) = 8.043, P < 0.01; N = 6 mice, test 1(laser off) vs. test 2(laser on), P < 0.01, test 2(laser on) vs. test 3(laser off), P < 0.01, Bonferroni’s post-test; PL-SOM-eYFP: one-way ANOVA, F(2,15) = 1.218, P = 0.3234; N = 6 mice, test 1(laser off)vs. test 2(laser on), P = 0.4702, test 2(laser on) vs. test 3(laser off), P > 0.99, Bonferroni’s post-test) during CS- and CS+ retrieval before, during, and after laser stimulation. G Schematics of injections of hM4D or mCherry control virus in PL and hM3D or eYFP control virus in PVT in SOM-Cre mice (left) and experimental procedure (right). H Freezing levels (left, PVT-3D-PL-SOM-4D: two-way ANOVA, interaction, F(2,24) = 0.2254, P = 0.7998, stimulus, F(1,24) = 410.3, P < 0.0001, treatment, F(2,24) = 0.7848, P = 0.4676; N = 9 mice, CS-(pre CNO) vs. CS-(CNO), P = 0.6217, CS-(CNO)vs.(post CNO), P > 0.99, Bonferroni’s post-test; PVT-eYFP-PL-SOM-mCherry: two-way ANOVA, interaction, F(2,15) = 0.1386,P = 0.8717, stimulus, F(1,15) = 167.8, P < 0.0001, treatment, F(2,15) = 0.8622, P = 0.4421; N = 6 mice, CS-(pre CNO)vs. CS-(CNO), P > 0.99, CS-(CNO) vs.(post CNO), P > 0.99, Bonferroni’s post-test) and discrimination index (right, PVT-hM3D-PL-SOM-hM4D: one-way ANOVA, F(2,24) = 0.5498, P = 0.5841; N = 9 mice, test 1(pre CNO)vs. test 2(CNO), P = 0.9826, test 2(CNO) vs. test 3(Post CNO), P > 0.99, Bonferroni’s post-test; PVT-eYFP-PL-SOM-mCherry: one-way ANOVA, F(2,15) = 0.2713, P = 0.7660; N = 6 mice, test 1(pre CNO)vs. test 2(CNO), P > 0.99, test 2(CNO)vs. test 3(post CNO), P > 0.99, Bonferroni’s post-test) during CS- and CS+ retrieval before, during, and after CNO injection.

Back to article page