Fig. 6: Inhibitory synaptic plasticity during memory consolidation carves selective engrams. | Nature Neuroscience

Fig. 6: Inhibitory synaptic plasticity during memory consolidation carves selective engrams.

From: Dynamic and selective engrams emerge with memory consolidation

Fig. 6: Inhibitory synaptic plasticity during memory consolidation carves selective engrams.The alt text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a, Schematic of simulation protocol with blockage of inhibitory synaptic plasticity during consolidation. bd, Means and 99% confidence intervals are shown. n = 10 trials. Color denotes stimulus as in Fig. 1c. b, Firing rate of engram cells averaged across all cue presentations during recall in a as a function of consolidation time (Methods). Dashed line indicates threshold ζthr = 10 Hz for engram cell activation. c, Memory recall in a as a function of consolidation time. d, Discrimination index between recall evoked by cues of the training stimulus and individual novel stimuli in a as a function of consolidation time (Methods). e, Schematic of experimental protocol with chemogenetic inhibition of DG CCK+ interneurons. f,g, Means and 99% confidence intervals are shown. f, Freezing levels during memory recall in e as a function of delay time. Top, control group. Bottom, CCK+ inhibition group. Two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test between freezing in the training and neutral contexts. Control, n = 9 mice per group. CCK+ inhibition, n = 9 mice per group. g, Discrimination index between freezing levels in the training and neutral contexts in f. Two-sided one-sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test against discrimination = 0. Control, n = 9 mice per group. CCK+ inhibition, n = 9 mice per group. h, Schematic of experimental protocol to measure the plasticity of DG CCK+ efferent synapses onto Cal-Light-labeled EGFP+ neurons using slice recordings. Ephys, electrophysiology. i,j, Means and s.e.m. are shown. i, oIPSCs recorded in h. Left, representative traces showing oIPSCs recorded in neighboring EGFP+ and EGFP neurons. Right, comparison of oIPSC amplitudes between EGFP+ and EGFP neurons. Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA with Greenhouse–Geisser correction. For EGFP+ versus EGFP, n = 12 neurons per group from three mice. j, oIPSCs recorded in the control (mCh) and CCK+ inhibition (hM4Di-mCh) groups in h. Left, representative traces showing oIPSCs recorded in neighboring EGFP+ and EGFP neurons. Right, comparison of normalized oIPSC amplitudes between EGFP+ and EGFP neurons. Paired t-test. mCh group, n = 12 neurons per group from three mice. hM4Di-mCh group, n = 10 neurons per group from three mice. f,g,i,j, *P < 0.05; NS, not significant. For detailed statistical test results, see Supplementary Table 1.

Source data

Back to article page