Memory enhancement by unconditioned and conditioned heroin withdrawal: Role of corticotropin-releasing factor in the central amygdala
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test the hypothesis that unconditioned and conditioned opioid withdrawal enhance memory consolidation through shared neurobiological mechanisms, the current study focused on the central amygdala (CeA) and local corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) neurotransmission. In the unconditioned withdrawal experiments, male Sprague-Dawley rats were implanted with subcutaneous osmotic mini-pumps releasing 3.5 mg/kg/day heroin (or sham surgery) and injected with 3 mg/kg naloxone (NLX) to precipitate withdrawal. In the conditioned withdrawal experiments, rats injected with heroin (2 mg/kg x 2 injections) received 3 mg/kg NLX immediately prior to confinement to one compartment (CS+) of a place conditioning apparatus, or vehicle prior to confinement in the alternative compartment (CS-). Using immunohistochemistry, it was established that both precipitated withdrawal and confinement to the withdrawal-paired CS + compartment elevated c-Fos expression within the CeA. More importantly, using the post-training approach to target consolidation of object memory, it was found that intra-CeA infusions of the CRF1 receptor antagonist ANT (0.2–2 μg/inf) blocked the memory-enhancing effects of both precipitated withdrawal and exposure to the withdrawal-paired CS + compartment. These findings indicate that pharmacological and conditioned opioid withdrawal influence memory consolidation through a common CRF-mediated mechanism within the CeA. • Precipitated withdrawal elevates c-Fos expression in the central amygdala. • Conditioned withdrawal elevates c-Fos expression in the central amygdala. • CRF1 receptor blockade in the central amygdala interferes with memory enhancement by precipitated withdrawal. • CRF1 receptor blockade in the central amygdala interferes with memory enhancement by conditioned withdrawal. • A common CRF-mediated mechanism in the central amygdala drives memory storage during withdrawal states.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".