Dopamine D1 receptor activation is involved in overcoming boundary conditions for destabilizing and updating object memories.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consolidated long-term memories can be modified when destabilized at reactivation (RA). This must be followed by an upregulation of protein synthesis to return the memory to a stable state. Reconsolidation is suggested to maintain the relevance of stored memories, preserving behavioral flexibility. Older or strongly encoded memories resist reconsolidation because of biological boundary conditions and destabilization of such memories is more likely in the presence of prediction error at reactivation. The neurotransmitter dopamine (DA), which has been implicated in prediction error, has been linked to destabilization using appetitive or aversive memory paradigms. However, more neutral memories also undergo modification to adapt to changing environments. Evidence suggests that a salient novel cue presented at reactivation can trigger destabilization of boundary condition-protected object memories, but DA has not yet been implicated in this process. Using male rats in a modified spontaneous object recognition task, we report that systemic administration of the D1 receptor (D1R) antagonist SCH23390 blocked recently encoded and novelty-induced relatively remote object memory destabilization. Further, systemic administration of the D1R agonist SKF38393 promoted destabilization of relatively remote memory traces in the absence of salient novelty at reactivation. Finally, systemic D1R antagonism and agonism blocked and promoted integrative memory updating, respectively, in the postreactivation object memory modification task. This work therefore advances current knowledge related to the role of DA in the dynamic nature of memory storage. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".