Stress, Memory, Forgetting and What, Lymnaea Can Tell us About a Stressful World
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
68The ability of animals to learn and remember during their lifetime allows them to successfully adapt to various environmental stressors. Stress modulates (either enhancing or diminishing) the ability to learn and the ability to form memory and the ability to recall memory. We have attempted to use environmentally relevant stressors (e.g., crowding, low levels of calcium, predator detection and thermal shock) to determine how the various stressors change the ability to learn, form memory and to recall that memory. It is difficult, if not impossible, to predict ahead of actually doing the experiment to say with any certainty how a specific stressor will alter memory formation and its recall. It is even more difficult to predict how a combination of stressors alters these cognitive events. Identical stressor stimuli affect different strains of Lymnaea (e.g., smart vs. average) differently. It may be that one of the “costs” of being “smart” is a poor ability to handle stress. The birth of modern neuroscience occurred in the 1950s. A number of seminal events associated with scientists and clinicians from the Montreal area played important but sometimes forgotten roles in establishing what we now call Neuroscience. One event was the brain surgery performed on a patient known as HM that lead to Brenda Milner’s team observations on human memory, which ultimately showed that specific neural circuits were necessary for different forms of declarative and non-declarative memory (Milner et al., 1998). Those observations formed the basis of many experiments that ultimately led to our present understanding of the molecular events occurring in specific neurons, which are necessary for memory formation. However, the techniques and knowledge needed to undertake those studies at the neuronal and circuit level depended in large measure on the realization that molluscs possess large, identifiable neurons, which controlled interesting, tractable behaviors. A second and a third event were the ideas put forward by Donald Hebb in the 1950s (the Hebb synapse (Hebb, 1949) and the inverted U shape function regarding stress and memory formation; Fig. 3.1). Interestingly, this latter idea is most often attributed to a paper by Yerkes and Dodson in 1908; but in reality Hebb (Hebb, 1954) conceived the notion of what is now commandingly referred to as the Yerkes–Dodson law (Lukowiak et al., 2015). Foundational studies that were also necessary for Neuroscience to become a “science” were occurring in France and Monaco led by Tauc (1954) and Arvanitaki and Chalazonitis (1955), respectively, using the central nervous system (CNS) of the sea hare (genus Aplysia). These studies 69laid the groundwork for the use of molluscan model systems to investigate the causal neuronal mechanisms of learning and memory. Building on these earlier studies, Kandel and Tauc’s (1965) discovery of heterosynaptic facilitation in a molluscan preparation laid the experimental groundwork for hypotheses developed subsequently to explain the “Hebb synapse” and the neuronal basis of learning and the subsequent formation of long-lasting memory. Ultimately, the research performed by a multitude of investigators using a wide variety of molluscan preparations culminated in Eric Kandel being awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology in 2000 “for the discoveries concerning signal transduction in the nervous system” (Kandel, 2001). In this chapter, I will tell two main stories. One a compelling (I hope) series of stories of how learning, memory, and forgetting are all altered by environmentally relevant stressors; and, two, why it is important to understand the neuroecology of the model system one works with.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle