Cdc42-Dependent Forgetting Regulates Repetition Effect in Prolonging Memory Retention

Genetics and Molecular Biology of Memory Suppression

The brain is designed not only with molecules and cellular processes that help to form memories but also with molecules and cellular processes that suppress the formation and retention of memory. The latter processes are critical for an efficient memory management system, given the vast amount of information that each person experiences in their daily activities and that most of this information becomes irrelevant with time. Thus, efficiency dictates that the brain should have processes for selecting the most critical information for storage and suppressing the irrelevant or forgetting it later should it escape the initial filters. Such memory suppressor molecules and processes are revealed by genetic or pharmacologic insults that lead to enhanced memory expression. We review here the predominant memory suppressor molecules and processes that have recently been discovered. They are diverse, as expected, because the brain is complex and employs many different strategies and mechanisms to form memories. They include the gene-repressive actions of small noncoding RNAs, repressors of protein synthesis, cAMP-mediated gene expression pathways, inter- and intracellular signaling pathways for normal forgetting, and others. A deep understanding of memory suppressor molecules and processes is necessary to fully comprehend how the brain forms, stabilizes, and retrieves memories and to reveal how brain disorders disrupt memory.

Active forgetting and neuropsychiatric diseases

Recent and pioneering animal research has revealed the brain utilizes a variety of molecular, cellular, and network-level mechanisms used to forget memories in a process referred to as "active forgetting". Active forgetting increases behavioral flexibility and removes irrelevant information. Individuals with impaired active forgetting mechanisms can experience intrusive memories, distressing thoughts, and unwanted impulses that occur in neuropsychiatric diseases. The current evidence indicates that active forgetting mechanisms degrade, or mask, molecular and cellular memory traces created in synaptic connections of "engram cells" that are specific for a given memory. Combined molecular genetic/behavioral studies using Drosophila have uncovered a complex system of cellular active-forgetting pathways within engram cells that is regulated by dopamine neurons and involves dopamine-nitric oxide co-transmission and reception, endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ signaling, and cytoskeletal remodeling machinery regulated by small GTPases. Some of these molecular cellular mechanisms have already been found to be conserved in mammals. Interestingly, some pathways independently regulate forgetting of distinct memory types and temporal phases, suggesting a multi-layering organization of forgetting systems. In mammals, active forgetting also involves modulation of memory trace synaptic strength by altering AMPA receptor trafficking. Furthermore, active-forgetting employs network level mechanisms wherein non-engram neurons, newly born-engram neurons, and glial cells regulate engram synapses in a state and experience dependent manner. Remarkably, there is evidence for potential coordination between the network and cellular level forgetting mechanisms. Finally, subjects with several neuropsychiatric diseases have been tested and shown to be impaired in active forgetting. Insights obtained from research on active forgetting in animal models will continue to enrich our understanding of the brain dysfunctions that occur in neuropsychiatric diseases.

Neural mechanisms of dopamine function in learning and memory in Caenorhabditis elegans

Research into learning and memory over the past decades has revealed key neurotransmitters that regulate these processes, many of which are evolutionarily conserved across diverse species. The monoamine neurotransmitter dopamine is one example of this, with countless studies demonstrating its importance in regulating behavioural plasticity. However, dopaminergic neural networks in the mammalian brain consist of hundreds or thousands of neurons, and thus cannot be studied at the level of single neurons acting within defined neural circuits. The nematode Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans) has an experimentally tractable nervous system with a completely characterized synaptic connectome. This makes it an advantageous system to undertake mechanistic studies into how dopamine encodes lasting yet flexible behavioural plasticity in the nervous system. In this review, we synthesize the research to date exploring the importance of dopaminergic signalling in learning, memory formation, and forgetting, focusing on research in C. elegans. We also explore the potential for dopamine-specific fluorescent biosensors in C. elegans to visualize dopaminergic neural circuits during learning and memory formation in real-time. We propose that the use of these sensors in C. elegans, in combination with optogenetic and other light-based approaches, will further illuminate the detailed spatiotemporal requirements for encoding behavioural plasticity in an accessible experimental system. Understanding the key molecules and circuit mechanisms that regulate learning and forgetting in more compact invertebrate nervous systems may reveal new druggable targets for enhancing memory storage and delaying memory loss in bigger brains.

Forgotten memory storage and retrieval in Drosophila

Inaccessibility of stored memory in ensemble cells through the forgetting process causes animals to be unable to respond to natural recalling cues. While accumulating evidence has demonstrated that reactivating memory-stored cells can switch cells from an inaccessible state to an accessible form and lead to recall of previously learned information, the underlying cellular and molecular mechanisms remain elusive. The current study used Drosophila as a model to demonstrate that the memory of one-trial aversive olfactory conditioning, although inaccessible within a few hours after learning, is stored in KCαβ and retrievable after mild retraining. One-trial aversive conditioning triggers protein synthesis to form a long-lasting cellular memory trace, approximately 20 days, via creb in KCαβ, and a transient cellular memory trace, approximately one day, via orb in MBON-α3. PPL1-α3 negatively regulates forgotten one-trial conditioning memory retrieval. The current study demonstrated that KCαβ, PPL1-α3, and MBON-α3 collaboratively regulate the formation of forgotten one-cycle aversive conditioning memory formation and retrieval.

Learning and memory using Drosophila melanogaster: a focus on advances made in the fifth decade of research

In the last decade, researchers using Drosophila melanogaster have made extraordinary progress in uncovering the mysteries underlying learning and memory. This progress has been propelled by the amazing toolkit available that affords combined behavioral, molecular, electrophysiological, and systems neuroscience approaches. The arduous reconstruction of electron microscopic images resulted in a first-generation connectome of the adult and larval brain, revealing complex structural interconnections between memory-related neurons. This serves as substrate for future investigations on these connections and for building complete circuits from sensory cue detection to changes in motor behavior. Mushroom body output neurons (MBOn) were discovered, which individually forward information from discrete and non-overlapping compartments of the axons of mushroom body neurons (MBn). These neurons mirror the previously discovered tiling of mushroom body axons by inputs from dopamine neurons and have led to a model that ascribes the valence of the learning event, either appetitive or aversive, to the activity of different populations of dopamine neurons and the balance of MBOn activity in promoting avoidance or approach behavior. Studies of the calyx, which houses the MBn dendrites, have revealed a beautiful microglomeruluar organization and structural changes of synapses that occur with long-term memory (LTM) formation. Larval learning has advanced, positioning it to possibly lead in producing new conceptual insights due to its markedly simpler structure over the adult brain. Advances were made in how cAMP response element-binding protein interacts with protein kinases and other transcription factors to promote the formation of LTM. New insights were made on Orb2, a prion-like protein that forms oligomers to enhance synaptic protein synthesis required for LTM formation. Finally, Drosophila research has pioneered our understanding of the mechanisms that mediate permanent and transient active forgetting, an important function of the brain along with acquisition, consolidation, and retrieval. This was catalyzed partly by the identification of memory suppressor genes-genes whose normal function is to limit memory formation.

Roles of Rac1-Dependent Intrinsic Forgetting in Memory-Related Brain Disorders: Demon or Angel

Animals are required to handle daily massive amounts of information in an ever-changing environment, and the resulting memories and experiences determine their survival and development, which is critical for adaptive evolution. However, intrinsic forgetting, which actively deletes irrelevant information, is equally important for memory acquisition and consolidation. Recently, it has been shown that Rac1 activity plays a key role in intrinsic forgetting, maintaining the balance of the brain's memory management system in a controlled manner. In addition, dysfunctions of Rac1-dependent intrinsic forgetting may contribute to memory deficits in neurological and neurodegenerative diseases. Here, these new findings will provide insights into the neurobiology of memory and forgetting, pathological mechanisms and potential therapies for brain disorders that alter intrinsic forgetting mechanisms.

LIM-kinase 1 effects on memory abilities and male courtship song in Drosophila depend on the neuronal type

The signal pathway of actin remodeling, including LIM-kinase 1 (LIMK1) and its substrate cofilin, regulates multiple processes in neurons of vertebrates and invertebrates. Drosophila melanogaster is widely used as a model object for studying mechanisms of memory formation, storage, retrieval and forgetting. Previously, active forgetting in Drosophila was investigated in the standard Pavlovian olfactory conditioning paradigm. The role of specific dopaminergic neurons (DAN) and components of the actin remodeling pathway in different forms of forgetting was shown. In our research, we investigated the role of LIMK1 in Drosophila memory and forgetting in the conditioned courtship suppression paradigm (CCSP). In the Drosophila brain, LIMK1 and p-cofilin levels appeared to be low in specific neuropil structures, including the mushroom body (MB) lobes and the central complex. At the same time, LIMK1 was observed in cell bodies, such as DAN clusters regulating memory formation in CCSP. We applied GAL4 × UAS binary system to induce limk1 RNA interference in different types of neurons. The hybrid strain with limk1 interference in MB lobes and glia showed an increase in 3-h short-term memory (STM), without significant effects on long-term memory. limk1 interference in cholinergic neurons (CHN) impaired STM, while its interference in DAN and serotoninergic neurons (SRN) also dramatically impaired the flies' learning ability. By contrast, limk1 interference in fruitless neurons (FRN) resulted in increased 15-60 min STM, indicating a possible LIMK1 role in active forgetting. Males with limk1 interference in CHN and FRN also showed the opposite trends of courtship song parameters changes. Thus, LIMK1 effects on the Drosophila male memory and courtship song appeared to depend on the neuronal type or brain structure.

Spontaneous recovery of reward memory through active forgetting of extinction memory

Learned behavior can be suppressed by the extinction procedure. Such extinguished memory often returns spontaneously over time, making it difficult to treat diseases such as addiction. However, the biological mechanisms underlying such spontaneous recovery remain unclear. Here, we report that the extinguished reward memory in Drosophila recovers spontaneously because extinction training forms an aversive memory that can be actively forgotten via the Rac1/Dia pathway. Manipulating Rac1 activity does not affect sugar-reward memory and its immediate extinction effect but bidirectionally regulates spontaneous recovery-the decay process of extinction. Experiments using thermogenetic inhibition and functional imaging support that such extinction appears to be coded as an aversive experience. Genetic and pharmacological inhibition of formin Dia, a downstream effector of Rac1, specifically prevents spontaneous recovery after extinction in both behavioral performance and corresponding physiological traces. Together, our data suggest that spontaneous recovery is caused by active forgetting of the opposing extinction memory.

Genetic dissection of mutual interference between two consecutive learning tasks in Drosophila

Animals can continuously learn different tasks to adapt to changing environments and, therefore, have strategies to effectively cope with inter-task interference, including both proactive interference (Pro-I) and retroactive interference (Retro-I). Many biological mechanisms are known to contribute to learning, memory, and forgetting for a single task, however, mechanisms involved only when learning sequential different tasks are relatively poorly understood. Here, we dissect the respective molecular mechanisms of Pro-I and Retro-I between two consecutive associative learning tasks in Drosophila. Pro-I is more sensitive to an inter-task interval (ITI) than Retro-I. They occur together at short ITI (<20 min), while only Retro-I remains significant at ITI beyond 20 min. Acutely overexpressing Corkscrew (CSW), an evolutionarily conserved protein tyrosine phosphatase SHP2, in mushroom body (MB) neurons reduces Pro-I, whereas acute knockdown of CSW exacerbates Pro-I. Such function of CSW is further found to rely on the γ subset of MB neurons and the downstream Raf/MAPK pathway. In contrast, manipulating CSW does not affect Retro-I as well as a single learning task. Interestingly, manipulation of Rac1, a molecule that regulates Retro-I, does not affect Pro-I. Thus, our findings suggest that learning different tasks consecutively triggers distinct molecular mechanisms to tune proactive and retroactive interference.

Small G protein RAC-2 regulates forgetting via the JNK-1 signalling pathway in Caenorhabditis elegans

Although forgetting was once regarded as a passive decline in memory and an occasional source of embarrassment, recent research suggests that it is an active biological process of removing outdated or irrelevant memories via activation of specific genes and signal transduction pathways. Rho family G proteins are known to have a role in synaptic plasticity mediated by the actin cytoskeleton. However, the current study reveals that another Rho guanosine triphosphate enzyme (GTPase), RAC-2, facilitates the occurrence of forgetting in Caenorhabditis elegans independent of actin dynamics. Functioning downstream of RAC-2 in the same signalling pathway, JNK-1 and its phosphorylated protein are required to positively regulate forgetting. The pan-neuronal rescue of RAC-2 or JNK-1, instead of AWC neuron-specific expression, reverses the delayed forgetting caused by the rac-2 mutation, which indicates that the involvement of RAC-2/JNK-1 in more than AWCs must be required. In summary, our work elucidates the action of the Rho GTPase RAC-2 and downstream JNK-1 as a potential novel pathway in forgetting in C. elegans.

Decoding brain memory formation by single-cell RNA sequencing

To understand how distinct memories are formed and stored in the brain is an important and fundamental question in neuroscience and computational biology. A population of neurons, termed engram cells, represents the physiological manifestation of a specific memory trace and is characterized by dynamic changes in gene expression, which in turn alters the synaptic connectivity and excitability of these cells. Recent applications of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) and single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) are promising approaches for delineating the dynamic expression profiles in these subsets of neurons, and thus understanding memory-specific genes, their combinatorial patterns and regulatory networks. The aim of this article is to review and discuss the experimental and computational procedures of sc/snRNA-seq, new studies of molecular mechanisms of memory aided by sc/snRNA-seq in human brain diseases and related mouse models, and computational challenges in understanding the regulatory mechanisms underlying long-term memory formation.

Anesthesia Resistant Memories in Drosophila, a Working Perspective

Memories are lasting representations over time of associations between stimuli or events. In general, the relatively slow consolidation of memories requires protein synthesis with a known exception being the so-called Anesthesia Resistant Memory (ARM) in Drosophila. This protein synthesis-independent memory type survives amnestic shocks after a short, sensitive window post training, and can also emerge after repeated cycles of training in a negatively reinforced olfactory conditioning task, without rest between cycles (massed conditioning—MC). We discussed operational and molecular mechanisms that mediate ARM and differentiate it from protein synthesis-dependent long-term memory (LTM) in Drosophila. Based on the notion that ARM is unlikely to specifically characterize Drosophila, we examined protein synthesis and MC-elicited memories in other species and based on intraspecies shared molecular components and proposed potential relationships of ARM with established memory types in Drosophila and vertebrates.

Age-related memory vulnerability to interfering stimuli is caused by gradual loss of MAPK-dependent protection in Drosophila

Age‐related memory impairment (AMI) is a common phenomenon across species. Vulnerability to interfering stimuli has been proposed to be an important cause of AMI. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying this vulnerability‐related AMI remain unknown. Here we show that learning‐activated MAPK signals are gradually lost with age, leading to vulnerability‐related AMI in Drosophila. Young flies (2‐ or 3‐day‐old) exhibited a significant increase in phosphorylated MAPK levels within 15 min after learning, whereas aged flies (25‐day‐old) did not. Compared to 3‐day‐old flies, significant 1 h memory impairments were observed in 15‐, 20‐, and 30‐day‐old flies, but not in 10‐day‐old flies. However, with post‐learning interfering stimuli such as cooling or electric stimuli, 10‐day‐old flies had worse memory performance at 1 h than 3‐day‐old flies, showing a premature AMI phenomenon. Increasing learning‐activated MAPK signals through acute transgene expression in mushroom body (MB) neurons restored physiological trace of 1 h memory in a pair of MB output neurons in aged flies. Decreasing such signals in young flies mimicked the impairment of 1 h memory trace in aged flies. Restoring learning‐activated MAPK signals in MB neurons in aged flies significantly suppressed AMI even with interfering stimuli. Thus, our data suggest that age‐related loss of learning‐activated neuronal MAPK signals causes memory vulnerability to interfering stimuli, thereby leading to AMI.

Regulation of Cdc42 signaling by the dopamine D2 receptor in a mouse model of Parkinson's disease

Substantial spine loss in striatal medium spiny neurons (MSNs) and abnormal behaviors are common features of Parkinson's disease (PD). The caudate putamen (CPu) mainly contains MSNs expressing dopamine D1 receptor (dMSNs) and dopamine D2 receptor (iMSNs) exerting critical effects on motor and cognition behavior. However, the molecular mechanisms contributing to spine loss and abnormal behaviors in dMSNs and iMSNs under parkinsonian state remain unknown. In the present study, we revealed that Cell division control protein 42 (Cdc42) signaling was significantly decreased in the caudate putamen (CPu) in parkinsonian mice. In addition, overexpression of constitutively active Cdc42 in the CPu reversed spine abnormalities and improved the behavior deficits in parkinsonian mice. Utilizing conditional dopamine D1 receptor (D1R) or D2 receptor (D2R) knockout mice, we found that such a decrease under parkinsonian state was further reduced by conditional knockout of the D2R but not D1R. Moreover, the thin spine loss in iMSNs and deficits in motor coordination and cognition induced by conditional knockout of D2R were reversed by overexpression of constitutively active Cdc42 in the CPu. Additionally, conditional knockout of Cdc42 from D2R‐positive neurons in the CPu was sufficient to induce spine and behavior deficits similar to those observed in parkinsonian mice. Overall, our results indicate that impaired Cdc42 signaling regulated by D2R plays an important role in spine loss and behavioral deficits in PD.

Forgetting as a form of adaptive engram cell plasticity

One leading hypothesis suggests that memories are stored in ensembles of neurons (or 'engram cells') and that successful recall involves reactivation of these ensembles. A logical extension of this idea is that forgetting occurs when engram cells cannot be reactivated. Forms of 'natural forgetting' vary considerably in terms of their underlying mechanisms, time course and reversibility. However, we suggest that all forms of forgetting involve circuit remodelling that switches engram cells from an accessible state (where they can be reactivated by natural recall cues) to an inaccessible state (where they cannot). In many cases, forgetting rates are modulated by environmental conditions and we therefore propose that forgetting is a form of neuroplasticity that alters engram cell accessibility in a manner that is sensitive to mismatches between expectations and the environment. Moreover, we hypothesize that disease states associated with forgetting may hijack natural forgetting mechanisms, resulting in reduced engram cell accessibility and memory loss.

Memory suppressor genes: Modulating acquisition, consolidation, and forgetting

The brain has a remarkable but underappreciated capacity to limit memory formation and expression. The term "memory suppressor gene" was coined in 1998 as an attempt to explain emerging reports that some genes appeared to limit memory. At that time, only a handful of memory suppressor genes were known, and they were understood to work by limiting cAMP-dependent consolidation. In the intervening decades, almost 100 memory suppressor genes with diverse functions have been discovered that affect not only consolidation but also acquisition and forgetting. Here we highlight the surprising extent to which biological limits are placed on memory formation through reviewing the literature on memory suppressor genes. In this review, we present memory suppressors within the framework of their actions on different memory operations: acquisition, consolidation, and forgetting. This is followed by a discussion of the reasons why there may be a biological need to limit memory formation.

Bidirectional role of dopamine in learning and memory-active forgetting

Dopaminergic neurons projecting from the Substantia Nigra to the Striatum play a critical role in motor functions while dopaminergic neurons originating in the Ventral Tegmental Area (VTA) and projecting to the Nucleus Accumbens, Hippocampus and other cortical structures regulate rewarding learning. While VTA mainly consists of dopaminergic neurons, excitatory (glutamate) and inhibitory (GABA) VTA-neurons have also been described: these neurons may also modulate and contribute to shape the final dopaminergic response, which is critical for memory formation. However, given the large amount of information that is handled daily by our brain, it is essential that irrelevant information be deleted. Recently, apart from the well-established role of dopamine (DA) in learning, it has been shown that DA plays a critical role in the intrinsic active forgetting mechanisms that control storage information, contributing to the deletion of a consolidated memory. These new insights may be instrumental to identify therapies for those disorders that involve memory alterations.

Rho Signaling in Synaptic Plasticity, Memory, and Brain Disorders

Memory impairments are associated with many brain disorders such as autism, Alzheimer's disease, and depression. Forming memories involves modifications of synaptic transmission and spine morphology. The Rho family small GTPases are key regulators of synaptic plasticity by affecting various downstream molecules to remodel the actin cytoskeleton. In this paper, we will review recent studies on the roles of Rho proteins in the regulation of hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD), the most extensively studied forms of synaptic plasticity widely regarded as cellular mechanisms for learning and memory. We will also discuss the involvement of Rho signaling in spine morphology, the structural basis of synaptic plasticity and memory formation. Finally, we will review the association between brain disorders and abnormalities of Rho function. It is expected that studying Rho signaling at the synapse will contribute to the understanding of how memory is formed and disrupted in diseases.

The Making of Long-Lasting Memories: A Fruit Fly Perspective

Understanding the nature of the molecular mechanisms underlying memory formation, consolidation, and forgetting are some of the fascinating questions in modern neuroscience. The encoding, stabilization and elimination of memories, rely on the structural reorganization of synapses. These changes will enable the facilitation or depression of neural activity in response to the acquisition of new information. In other words, these changes affect the weight of specific nodes within a neural network. We know that these plastic reorganizations require de novo protein synthesis in the context of Long-term memory (LTM). This process depends on neural activity triggered by the learned experience. The use of model organisms like Drosophila melanogaster has been proven essential for advancing our knowledge in the field of neuroscience. Flies offer an optimal combination of a more straightforward nervous system, composed of a limited number of cells, and while still displaying complex behaviors. Studies in Drosophila neuroscience, which expanded over several decades, have been critical for understanding the cellular and molecular mechanisms leading to the synaptic and behavioral plasticity occurring in the context of learning and memory. This is possible thanks to sophisticated technical approaches that enable precise control of gene expression in the fruit fly as well as neural manipulation, like chemogenetics, thermogenetics, or optogenetics. The search for the identity of genes expressed as a result of memory acquisition has been an active interest since the origins of behavioral genetics. From screenings of more or less specific candidates to broader studies based on transcriptome analysis, our understanding of the genetic control behind LTM has expanded exponentially in the past years. Here we review recent literature regarding how the formation of memories induces a rapid, extensive and, in many cases, transient wave of transcriptional activity. After a consolidation period, transcriptome changes seem more stable and likely represent the synthesis of new proteins. The complexity of the circuitry involved in memory formation and consolidation is such that there are localized changes in neural activity, both regarding temporal dynamics and the nature of neurons and subcellular locations affected, hence inducing specific temporal and localized changes in protein expression. Different types of neurons are recruited at different times into memory traces. In LTM, the synthesis of new proteins is required in specific subsets of cells. This de novo translation can take place in the somatic cytoplasm and/or locally in distinct zones of compartmentalized synaptic activity, depending on the nature of the proteins and the plasticity-inducing processes that occur. We will also review recent advances in understanding how localized changes are confined to the relevant synapse. These recent studies have led to exciting discoveries regarding proteins that were not previously involved in learning and memory processes. This invaluable information will lead to future functional studies on the roles that hundreds of new molecular actors play in modulating neural activity.

Ras acts as a molecular switch between two forms of consolidated memory in Drosophila

Long-lasting, consolidated memories require not only positive biological processes that facilitate long-term memories (LTM) but also the suppression of inhibitory processes that prevent them. The mushroom body neurons (MBn) in Drosophila melanogaster store protein synthesis-dependent LTM (PSD-LTM) as well as protein synthesis-independent, anesthesia-resistant memory (ARM). The formation of ARM inhibits PSD-LTM but the underlying molecular processes that mediate this interaction remain unknown. Here, we demonstrate that the Ras→Raf→rho kinase (ROCK) pathway in MBn suppresses ARM consolidation, allowing the formation of PSD-LTM. Our initial results revealed that the effects of Ras on memory are due to postacquisition processes. Ras knockdown enhanced memory expression but had no effect on acquisition. Additionally, increasing Ras activity optogenetically after, but not before, acquisition impaired memory performance. The elevated memory produced by Ras knockdown is a result of increased ARM. While Ras knockdown enhanced the consolidation of ARM, it eliminated PSD-LTM. We found that these effects are mediated by the downstream kinase Raf. Similar to Ras, knockdown of Raf enhanced ARM consolidation and impaired PSD-LTM. Surprisingly, knockdown of the canonical downstream extracellular signal-regulated kinase did not reproduce the phenotypes observed with Ras and Raf knockdown. Rather, Ras/Raf inhibition of ROCK was found to be responsible for suppressing ARM. Constitutively active ROCK enhanced ARM and impaired PSD-LTM, while decreasing ROCK activity rescued the enhanced ARM produced by Ras knockdown. We conclude that MBn Ras/Raf inhibition of ROCK suppresses the consolidation of ARM, which permits the formation of PSD-LTM.

Social Isolation Induces Rac1-Dependent Forgetting of Social Memory

Social isolation (SI) has detrimental effects on human and animal cognitive functions. In particular, acute isolation in adult mice impairs social recognition memory (SRM). Previous accounts of this impairment have focused primarily on memory consolidation. However, the current study suggests that impaired SRM results from enhanced forgetting. SI accelerates SRM decay without affecting memory formation. The impairment is caused by elevated Rac1 activity in the hippocampus. Using adeno-associated-virus-based genetic manipulation, we found that inhibition of Rac1 activity blocked forgetting of SRM in isolated adult mice, whereas activation of Rac1 accelerated forgetting in group-housed mice. Moreover, resocialization reversed the accelerated forgetting following isolation in correlation with suppression of Rac1 activity. In addition, accelerated long-term potentiation (LTP) decay in isolated mice brain slices was rescued by inhibition of Rac1 activity. Taken together, the findings lead us to conclude that social memory deficits in isolated mice are mediated by enhanced Rac1-dependent forgetting.

Distinct Genetic Signatures of Cortical and Subcortical Regions Associated with Human Memory

Despite the discovery of gene variants linked to memory performance, understanding the genetic basis of adult human memory remains a challenge. Here, we devised an unsupervised framework that relies on spatial correlations between human transcriptome data and functional neuroimaging maps to uncover the genetic signatures of memory in functionally-defined cortical and subcortical memory regions.

Despite the discovery of gene variants linked to memory performance, understanding the genetic basis of adult human memory remains a challenge. Here, we devised an unsupervised framework that relies on spatial correlations between human transcriptome data and functional neuroimaging maps to uncover the genetic signatures of memory in functionally-defined cortical and subcortical memory regions. Results were validated with animal literature and showed that our framework is highly effective in identifying memory-related processes and genes compared to a control cognitive function. Genes preferentially expressed in cortical memory regions are linked to memory-related processes such as immune and epigenetic regulation. Genes expressed in subcortical memory regions are associated with neurogenesis and glial cell differentiation. Genes expressed in both cortical and subcortical memory areas are involved in the regulation of transcription, synaptic plasticity, and glutamate receptor signaling. Furthermore, distinct memory-associated genes such as PRKCD and CDK5 are linked to cortical and subcortical regions, respectively. Thus, cortical and subcortical memory regions exhibit distinct genetic signatures that potentially reflect functional differences in health and disease, and nominates gene candidates for future experimental investigations.

Dopamine D1 and D2 Receptors Differentially Regulate Rac1 and Cdc42 Signaling in the Nucleus Accumbens to Modulate Behavioral and Structural Plasticity After Repeated Methamphetamine Treatment

BACKGROUND

Methamphetamine (METH) is a highly addictive psychostimulant that strongly activates dopamine receptor signaling in the nucleus accumbens (NAc). However, how dopamine D₁ and D₂ receptors (D₁Rs and D₂Rs, respectively) as well as downstream signaling pathways, such as those involving Rac1 and Cdc42, modulate METH-induced behavioral and structural plasticity is largely unknown.

METHODS

Using NAc conditional D₁R and D₂R deletion mice, Rac1 and Cdc42 mutant viruses, and a series of behavioral and morphological methods, we assessed the effects of D₁Rs and D₂Rs on Rac1 and Cdc42 in modulating METH-induced behavioral and structural plasticity in the NAc.

RESULTS

D₁Rs and D₂Rs in the NAc consistently regulated METH-induced conditioned place preference, locomotor activation, and dendritic and spine remodeling of medium spiny neurons but differentially regulated METH withdrawal-induced spatial learning and memory impairment and anxiety. Interestingly, Rac1 and Cdc42 signaling were oppositely modulated by METH, and suppression of Rac1 signaling and activation of Cdc42 signaling were crucial to METH-induced conditioned place preference and structural plasticity but not to locomotor activation. D₁Rs activated Rac1 and Cdc42 signaling, while D₂Rs inhibited Rac1 signaling but activated Cdc42 signaling to mediate METH-induced conditioned place preference and structural plasticity but not locomotor activation. In addition, NAc D₁R deletion aggravated METH withdrawal-induced spatial learning and memory impairment by suppressing Rac1 signaling but not Cdc42 signaling, while NAc D₂R deletion aggravated METH withdrawal-induced anxiety without affecting Rac1 or Cdc42 signaling.

CONCLUSIONS

D₁Rs and D₂Rs differentially regulate Rac1 and Cdc42 signaling to modulate METH-induced behavioral plasticity and the structural remodeling of medium spiny neurons in the NAc.

Interplay between α2-chimaerin and Rac1 activity determines dynamic maintenance of long-term memory

Memory consolidation theory suggests that once memory formation has been completed, memory is maintained at a stable strength and is incapable of further enhancement. However, the current study reveals that even long after formation, contextual fear memory could be further enhanced. Such unexpected enhancement is possible because memory is dynamically maintained at an intermediate level that allows for bidirectional regulation. Here we find that both Rac1 activation and expression of α2-chimaerin are stimulated by single-trial contextual fear conditioning. Such sustained Rac1 activity mediates reversible forgetting, and α2-chimaerin acts as a memory molecule that reverses forgetting to sustain memory through inhibition of Rac1 activity during the maintenance stage. Therefore, the balance between activated Rac1 and expressed α2-chimaerin defines dynamic long-term memory maintenance. Our findings demonstrate that consolidated memory maintains capacity for bidirectional regulation.

Long-term memory is formed immediately without the need for protein synthesis-dependent consolidation in Drosophila

It is believed that long-term memory (LTM) cannot be formed immediately because it must go through a protein synthesis-dependent consolidation process. However, the current study uses Drosophila aversive olfactory conditioning to show that such processes are dispensable for context-dependent LTM (cLTM). Single-trial conditioning yields cLTM that is formed immediately in a protein-synthesis independent manner and is sustained over 14 days without decay. Unlike retrieval of traditional LTM, which requires only the conditioned odour and is mediated by mushroom-body neurons, cLTM recall requires both the conditioned odour and reinstatement of the training-environmental context. It is mediated through lateral-horn neurons that connect to multiple sensory brain regions. The cLTM cannot be retrieved if synaptic transmission from any one of these centres is blocked, with effects similar to those of altered encoding context during retrieval. The present study provides strong evidence that long-term memory can be formed easily without the need for consolidation.

New protein synthesis is known to be indispensable for the consolidation of long-term memory. Here, the authors report that an olfactory memory can be successfully recalled after 14 days without protein synthesis when the training context is also provided in addition to the conditioned odor.

Genetic dissection of active forgetting in labile and consolidated memories in Drosophila

Different memory components are forgotten through distinct molecular mechanisms. In Drosophila, the activation of 2 Rho GTPases (Rac1 and Cdc42), respectively, underlies the forgetting of an early labile memory (anesthesia-sensitive memory, ASM) and a form of consolidated memory (anesthesia-resistant memory, ARM). Here, we dissected the molecular mechanisms that tie Rac1 and Cdc42 to the different types of memory forgetting. We found that 2 WASP family proteins, SCAR/WAVE and WASp, act downstream of Rac1 and Cdc42 separately to regulate ASM and ARM forgetting in mushroom body neurons. Arp2/3 complex, which organizes branched actin polymerization, is a canonical downstream effector of WASP family proteins. However, we found that Arp2/3 complex is required in Cdc42/WASp-mediated ARM forgetting but not in Rac1/SCAR-mediated ASM forgetting. Instead, we identified that Rac1/SCAR may function with formin Diaphanous (Dia), a nucleator that facilitates linear actin polymerization, in ASM forgetting. The present study, complementing the previously identified Rac1/cofilin pathway that regulates actin depolymerization, suggests that Rho GTPases regulate forgetting by recruiting both actin polymerization and depolymerization pathways. Moreover, Rac1 and Cdc42 may regulate different types of memory forgetting by tapping into different actin polymerization mechanisms.

The Role of Actin Cytoskeleton in Dendritic Spines in the Maintenance of Long-Term Memory

Evidence indicates that long-term memory formation involves alterations in synaptic efficacy produced by modifications in neural transmission and morphology. However, it is not clear how such alterations induced by learning, that encode memory, are maintained over long period of time to preserve long-term memory. This is especially intriguing as the half-life of most of the proteins that underlie such changes is usually in the range of hours to days and these proteins may change their location over time. In this review we describe studies that indicate the involvement of dendritic spines in memory formation and its maintenance. These studies show that learning leads to changes in the number and morphology of spines. Disruption in spines morphology or manipulations that lead to alteration in their number after consolidation are associated with impairment in memory maintenance. We further ask how changes in dendritic spines morphology, induced by learning and reputed to encode memory, are maintained to preserve long-term memory. We propose a mechanism, based on studies described in the review, whereby the actin cytoskeleton and its regulatory proteins involved in the initial alteration in spine morphology induced by learning are also essential for spine structural stabilization that maintains long-term memory. In this model glutamate receptors and other synaptic receptors activation during learning leads to the creation of new actin cytoskeletal scaffold leading to changes in spines morphology and memory formation. This new actin cytoskeletal scaffold is preserved beyond actin and its regulatory proteins turnover and dynamics by active stabilization of the level and activity of actin regulatory proteins within these memory spines.

Neural, Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Active Forgetting

The neurobiology of memory formation attracts much attention in the last five decades. Conversely, the rules that govern and the mechanisms underlying forgetting are less understood. In addition to retroactive interference, retrieval-induced forgetting and passive decay of time, it has been recently demonstrated that the nervous system has a diversity of active and inherent processes involved in forgetting. In Drosophila, some operate mainly at an early stage of memory formation and involves dopamine (DA) neurons, specific postsynaptic DA receptor subtypes, Rac1 activation and induces rapid active forgetting. In mammals, others regulate forgetting and persistence of seemingly consolidated memories and implicate the activity of DA receptor subtypes and AMPA receptors in the hippocampus (HP) and related structures to activate parallel signaling pathways controlling active time-dependent forgetting. Most of them may involve plastic changes in synaptic and extrasynaptic receptors including specific removal of GluA2 AMPA receptors. Forgetting at longer timescales might also include changes in adult neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus (DG) of the HP. Therefore, based on relevance or value considerations neuronal circuits may regulate in a time-dependent manner what is formed, stored, and maintained and what is forgotten.

The Biology of Forgetting-A Perspective

Pioneering research studies, beginning with those using Drosophila, have identified several molecular and cellular mechanisms for active forgetting. The currently known mechanisms for active forgetting include neurogenesis-based forgetting, interference-based forgetting, and intrinsic forgetting, the latter term describing the brain's chronic signaling systems that function to slowly degrade molecular and cellular memory traces. The best-characterized pathway for intrinsic forgetting includes "forgetting cells" that release dopamine onto engram cells, mobilizing a signaling pathway that terminates in the activation of Rac1/Cofilin to effect changes in the actin cytoskeleton and neuron/synapse structure. Intrinsic forgetting may be the default state of the brain, constantly promoting memory erasure and competing with processes that promote memory stability like consolidation. A better understanding of active forgetting will provide insights into the brain's memory management system and human brain disorders that alter active forgetting mechanisms.

Personalized genetics of the cholinergic blockade of neuroinflammation

Acetylcholine signaling is essential for cognitive functioning and blocks inflammation. To maintain homeostasis, cholinergic signaling is subjected to multi‐leveled and bidirectional regulation by both proteins and non‐coding microRNAs (‘CholinomiRs’). CholinomiRs coordinate the cognitive and inflammatory aspects of cholinergic signaling by targeting major cholinergic transcripts including the acetylcholine hydrolyzing enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE). Notably, AChE inhibitors are the only currently approved line of treatment for Alzheimer's disease patients. Since cholinergic signaling blocks neuroinflammation which is inherent to Alzheimer's disease, genomic changes modifying AChE's properties and its susceptibility to inhibitors and/or to CholinomiRs regulation may affect the levels and properties of inflammasome components such as NLRP3. This calls for genomic‐based medicine approaches based on genotyping of both coding and non‐coding single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the genes involved in cholinergic signaling. An example is a SNP in a recognition element for the primate‐specific microRNA‐608 within the 3′ untranslated region of the AChE transcript. Carriers of the minor allele of that SNP present massively elevated brain AChE levels, increased trait anxiety and inflammation, accompanied by perturbed CholinomiR‐608 regulatory networks and elevated prefrontal activity under exposure to stressful insults. Several additional SNPs in the AChE and other cholinergic genes await further studies, and might likewise involve different CholinomiRs and pathways including those modulating the initiation and progression of neurodegenerative diseases. CholinomiRs regulation of the cholinergic system thus merits in‐depth interrogation and is likely to lead to personalized medicine approaches for achieving better homeostasis in health and disease.

This is an article for the special issue XVth International Symposium on Cholinergic Mechanisms.