Proteasome inhibition enhances the induction and impairs the maintenance of late-phase long-term potentiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protein degradation by the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway plays important roles in synaptic plasticity, but the molecular mechanisms by which proteolysis regulates synaptic strength are not well understood. We investigated the role of the proteasome in hippocampal late-phase long-term potentiation (L-LTP), a model for enduring synaptic plasticity. We show here that inhibition of the proteasome enhances the induction of L-LTP, but inhibits its maintenance. Proteasome inhibitor-mediated enhancement of the early part of L-LTP requires activation of NMDA receptors and the cAMP-dependent protein kinase. Augmentation of L-LTP induction by proteasome inhibition is blocked by a protein synthesis inhibitor anisomycin and is sensitive to the drug rapamycin. Our findings indicate that proteasome inhibition increases the induction of L-LTP by stabilizing locally translated proteins in dendrites. In addition, our data show that inhibition of the proteasome blocks transcription of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which is a cAMP-responsive element-binding protein (CREB)-inducible gene. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that the proteasome inhibitors block degradation of ATF4, a CREB repressor. Thus, proteasome inhibition appears to hinder CREB-mediated transcription. Our results indicate that blockade of proteasome activity obstructs the maintenance of L-LTP by interfering with transcription as well as translation required to sustain L-LTP. Thus, proteasome-mediated proteolysis has different roles during the induction and the maintenance of L-LTP.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".