Is affective learning really resistant to extinction? Stimulus ratings and affective priming give different answers

Affective learning, the learning of likes and dislikes, is proposed to differ from signal learning, the learning of relationships between events. However, affective learning research varies in the methodology used, and in addition, researchers concerned primarily with affective learning tend to use different paradigms from those concerned with signal learning. The current research used an affective priming task in addition to verbal ratings to assess changes in the valence of neutral geometric shapes in an aversive differential conditioning procedure. After acquisition, affective learning was present as indexed by ratings and affective priming, whereas after extinction, affective learning remained significant only in the ratings. This study suggests that different measures of affective learning may be differentially sensitive to valence, which has implications for studies that employ verbal ratings as the sole measure of affective learning. Moreover, there is no evidence from the current study that affective learning differs from signal learning.

Subtype-selective noncompetitive or competitive inhibition of human alpha(1)-adrenergic receptors by rho-TIA

The 19-amino acid conopeptide (rho-TIA) was shown previously to antagonize noncompetitively alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptors (ARs). Because this is the first peptide ligand for these receptors, we compared its interactions with the three recombinant human alpha(1)-AR subtypes (alpha(1A), alpha(1B), and alpha(1D)). Radioligand binding assays showed that rho-TIA was 10-fold selective for human alpha(1B)- over alpha(1A)- and alpha(1D)-ARs. As observed with hamster alpha(1B)-ARs, rho-TIA decreased the number of binding sites (B-max) for human alpha(1B)-ARs without changing affinity (K-D), and this inhibition was unaffected by the length of incubation but was reversed by washing. However, rho-TIA had opposite effects at human alpha(1A)-ARs and alpha(1D)-ARs, decreasing KD without changing Bmax, suggesting it acts competitively at these subtypes. rho-TIA reduced maximal NE-stimulated [H-3] inositol phosphate formation in HEK293 cells expressing human alpha(1B)-ARs but competitively inhibited responses in cells expressing alpha(1A)- or alpha(1D)-ARs. Truncation mutants showed that the amino-terminal domains of alpha(1B)- or alpha(1D)-ARs are not involved in interaction with rho-TIA. Alanine-scanning mutagenesis of rho-TIA showed F18A had an increased selectivity for alpha(1B)-ARs, and F18N also increased subtype selectivity. I8A had a slightly reduced potency at alpha(1B)-ARs and was found to be a competitive, rather than noncompetitive, inhibitor in both radioligand and functional assays. Thus rho-TIA noncompetitively inhibits alpha(1B)-ARs but competitively inhibits the other two subtypes, and this selectivity can be increased by mutation. These differential interactions do not involve the receptor amino termini and are not because of the charged nature of the peptide, and isoleucine 8 is critical for its noncompetitive inhibition at alpha(1B)-ARs.

Physiologic parameters that affect pulse transit time difference between the upper and lower limbs in children

Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is a known parameter that is related to arterial distensibility. However, its potential is hampered by the absence of appropriate techniques to estimate it noninvasively. PWV can be used as an assessment of increased arterial stiffness that is linked to systolic hypertension, excess cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.(1,2)