Contextual, but not auditory, fear conditioning is disrupted by neurotoxic selective lesion of the basal nucleus of amygdala in rats

The basolateral amygdala complex (BLA) is involved in acquisition of contextual and auditory fear conditioning. However, the BLA is not a single structure but comprises a group of nuclei, including the lateral (LA), basal (BA) and accessory basal (AB) nuclei. While it is consensual that the LA is critical for auditory fear conditioning, there is controversy on the participation of the BA in fear conditioning. Hodological and neurophysiological findings suggest that each of these nuclei processes distinct information in parallel; the BA would deal with polymodal or contextual representations, and the LA would process unimodal or elemental representations. Thus, it seems plausible to hypothesize that the BA is required for contextual, but not auditory, fear conditioning. This hypothesis was evaluated in Wistar rats submitted to multiple-site ibotenate-induced damage restricted to the BA and then exposed to a concurrent contextual and auditory fear conditioning training followed by separated contextual and auditory conditioning testing. Differing from electrolytic lesion and lidocaine inactivation, this surgical approach does not disturb fibers of passage originating in other brain areas, restricting damage to the aimed nucleus. Relative to the sham-operated controls, rats with selective damage to the BA exhibited disruption of performance in the contextual, but not the auditory, component of the task. Thus, while the BA seems required for contextual fear conditioning, it is not critical for both an auditory-US association, nor for the expression of the freezing response. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Acquisition of Pavlovian Fear Conditioning Using beta-Adrenoceptor Activation of the Dorsal Premammillary Nucleus as an Unconditioned Stimulus to Mimic Live Predator-Threat Exposure

In the present work, we sought to mimic the internal state changes in response to a predator threat by pharmacologically stimulating the brain circuit involved in mediating predator fear responses, and explored whether this stimulation would be a valuable unconditioned stimulus (US) in an olfactory fear conditioning paradigm (OFC). The dorsal premammillary nucleus (PMd) is a key brain structure in the neural processing of anti-predatory defensive behavior and has also been shown to mediate the acquisition and expression of anti-predatory contextual conditioning fear responses. Rats were conditioned by pairing the US, which was an intra-PMd microinjection of isoproterenol (ISO; beta-adrenoceptor agonist), with amyl acetate odor-the conditioned stimulus (CS). ISO (10 and 40 nmol) induced the acquisition of the OFC and the second-order association by activation of beta-1 receptors in the PMd. Furthermore, similar to what had been found for contextual conditioning to a predator threat, atenolol (beta-1 receptor antagonist) in the PMd also impaired the acquisition and expression of OFC promoted by ISO. Considering the strong glutamatergic projections from the PMd to the dorsal periaqueductal gray (dPAG), we tested how the glutamatergic blockade of the dPAG would interfere with the OFC induced by ISO. Accordingly, microinjections of NMDA receptor antagonist (AP5, 6 nmol) into the dPAG were able to block both the acquisition, and partially, the expression of the OFC. In conclusion, we have found that PMd beta-1 adrenergic stimulation is a good model to mimic predatory threat-induced internal state changes, and works as a US able to mobilize the same systems involved in the acquisition and expression of predator-related contextual conditioning. Neuropsychopharmacology (2011) 36, 926-939; doi:10.1038/npp.2010.231; published online 5 January 2011

Bond Strength and Etching Pattern of Adhesive Systems to Enamel: Effects of Conditioning Time and Enamel Preparation

Statement of the problem: The performance of self-etch systems on enamel is controversial and seems to be dependent on the application technique and the enamel preparation. Purpose of the Study: To examine the effects of conditioning time and enamel surface preparation on bond strength and etching pattern of adhesive systems to enamel. Materials and Methods: Ninety-six teeth were divided into 16 conditions (N = 6) in function of enamel preparation and conditioning time for bond strength test. The adhesive systems OptiBond FL (Kerr, Orange, CA, USA), OptiBond SOLO Plus (Kerr), Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray, Osaka, Japan), and Adper Prompt L-Pop (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) were applied on unground or ground enamel following the manufacturers` directions or doubling the conditioning time. Cylinders of Filtek Flow (0.5-mm height) were applied to each bonded enamel surface using a Tygon tube (0.7 mm in diameter; Saint-Gobain Corp., Aurora, OH, USA). After storage (24 h/37 degrees C), the specimens were subjected to shear force (0.5 mm/min). The data were treated by a three-way analysis of variance and Tukey`s test (alpha = 0.05). The failure modes of the debonded interfaces and the etching pattern of adhesives were observed using scanning electron microscopy. Results: Only the main factor ""adhesive"" was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The lowest bond strength value was observed for OptiBond FL. The most defined etching pattern was observed for 35% phosphoric acid and for Adper Prompt L-Pop. Mixed failures were observed for all adhesives, but OptiBond FL showed cohesive failures in resin predominantly. Conclusions: The increase in the conditioning time as well as the enamel pretreatment did not provide an increase in the resin-enamel bond strength values for the studied adhesives. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE The surface enamel preparation and the conditioning time do not affect the performance of self-etch systems to enamel. (J Esthet Restor Dent 20:322-336, 2008)