Insights into the Role of Dopamine Receptor Systems in Learning and Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that learning and memory are complex processes involving and recruiting different brain modulatory neurotransmitter systems. Considerable evidence points to the involvement of dopamine in various aspects of cognition, and interest has been focused on investigating the clinical relevance of dopamine systems to age-related cognitive decline and manifestations of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. In the past decade or so, in spite of the molecular cloning of the five dopamine receptor subtypes, their specific roles in brain function remained inconclusive due to the lack of completely selective ligands that could distinguish between the members of the D1-like and D2-like dopamine receptor families. One of the most important advances in the field of dopamine research has been the generation of mutant mouse models permitting evaluation of the dopaminergic system using gene targeting technologies. These mouse models represent an important approach to explore the functional roles of closely related receptor subtypes. In this review, we present and discuss evidence on the role of dopamine receptors in different aspects of learning and memory at the cellular, molecular and behavioral levels. We compare evidence using conventional pharmacological, lesion or electrophysiological studies with results from mice with targeted deletions of different subtypes of dopamine receptor genes. We particularly focus on dopamine D1 and D2 receptors in an effort to delineate their specific roles in various aspects of cognitive function. We provide strong evidence, from our own recent work as well as others, that dopamine is part of the network that plays a very important role in cognitive function, and that although multiple dopamine receptor subtypes contribute to different aspects of learning and memory, the D1 receptor seems to play a more prominent role in mediating plasticity and specific aspects of cognitive function, including spatial learning and memory processes, reversal learning, extinction learning, and incentive learning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".