Acquisition and extinction of second-order context conditioned fear: Role of the amygdala

Exploring volumetric abnormalities in subcortical L-HPA axis structures in pediatric generalized anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND

Pediatric generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is debilitating and increasingly prevalent, yet its etiology remains unclear. Some believe the disorder to be propagated by chronic dysregulation of the limbic-hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (L-HPA) axis, but morphometric studies of implicated subcortical areas have been largely inconclusive. Recognizing that certain subcortical subdivisions are more directly involved in L-HPA axis functioning, this study aims to detect specific abnormalities in these critical areas.

METHODS

Thirty-eight MRI scans of preschool children with (n = 15) and without (n = 23) GAD underwent segmentation and between-group volumetric comparisons of the basolateral amygdala (BLA), ventral hippocampal subiculum (vSC), and mediodorsal medial magnocellular (MDm) area of the thalamus.

RESULTS

Children with GAD displayed significantly larger vSC compared to healthy peers, F(1, 31) = 6.50, pFDR = .048. On average, children with GAD presented with larger BLA and MDm, Fs(1, 31) ≥ 4.86, psFDR ≤ .054. Exploratory analyses revealed right-hemispheric lateralization of all measures, most notably the MDm, F(1, 31) = 8.13, pFDR = .024, the size of which scaled with symptom severity, r = .83, pFDR = .033.

CONCLUSION

The BLA, vSC, and MDm are believed to be involved in the regulation of anxiety and stress, both individually and collectively through the excitation and inhibition of the L-HPA axis. All were found to be enlarged in children with GAD, perhaps reflecting hypertrophy related to hyperexcitability, or early neuronal overgrowth. Longitudinal studies should investigate the relationship between these early morphological differences and the long-term subcortical atrophy previously observed.

Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) attenuates the primary conditioning of lithium chloride (LiCl)-induced context aversion but not the secondary conditioning of context aversion or taste avoidance

A first-order association can be formed between toxin-induced nausea and a context, as well as nausea and a taste cue. However, comparatively little is understood about second-order associations. The present study examined if the bacterial endotoxin, LPS, could impair the first- and second-order conditioning of context aversion (anticipatory nausea paradigm) and subsequent conditioned taste avoidance (two-bottle task). Adult male Long Evans rats were treated with LiCl (127 mg/kg, intraperitoneal [i.p.]) or vehicle control (NaCl) and then exposed to a distinct context for 4 first-order conditioning trials. LPS (200 μg/kg, i.p.) or NaCl were administered 24 h after each trial. Seventy-two h after the final first-order conditioning trial, rats underwent 2 second-order conditioning trials where they were treated with 2% saccharin (i.p.) and then exposed to the same context. Twenty-four h after the final second-order conditioning trial, rats were tested in a two-bottle task (2 trials), where they were given a choice between water and a palatable 0.2% saccharin solution. LiCl-treated rats demonstrated a context aversion by the 3rd conditioning trial in the anticipatory nausea paradigm. Rats previously exposed to LiCl also displayed a conditioned taste avoidance of saccharin within the two-bottle task. LPS attenuated first-order context aversion but did not alter either second-order context aversion or conditioned taste avoidance in the two-bottle task. This study demonstrated that a secondary association formed within an aversive context could result in a conditioned taste avoidance. Further, LPS may be able to attenuate primary conditioning, but not secondary conditioning.

The Basolateral Amygdala: The Core of a Network for Threat Conditioning, Extinction, and Second-Order Threat Conditioning

Threat conditioning, extinction, and second-order threat conditioning studied in animal models provide insight into the brain-based mechanisms of fear- and anxiety-related disorders and their treatment. Much attention has been paid to the role of the basolateral amygdala (BLA) in such processes, an overview of which is presented in this review. More recent evidence suggests that the BLA serves as the core of a greater network of structures in these forms of learning, including associative and sensory cortices. The BLA is importantly regulated by hippocampal and prefrontal inputs, as well as by the catecholaminergic neuromodulators, norepinephrine and dopamine, that may provide important prediction-error or learning signals for these forms of learning. The sensory cortices may be required for the long-term storage of threat memories. As such, future research may further investigate the potential of the sensory cortices for the long-term storage of extinction and second-order conditioning memories.

Second-order fear conditioning involves formation of competing stimulus-danger and stimulus-safety associations

How do animals process experiences that provide contradictory information? The present study addressed this question using second-order fear conditioning in rats. In second-order conditioning, rats are conditioned to fear a stimulus, S1, through its pairings with foot-shock (stage 1); and some days later, a second stimulus, S2, through its pairings with the already-conditioned S1 (stage 2). However, as foot-shock is never presented during conditioning to S2, we hypothesized that S2 simultaneously encodes 2 contradictory associations: one that drives fear to S2 (S2-danger) and another that reflects the absence of the expected unconditioned stimulus and partially masks that fear (e.g. S2-safety). We tested this hypothesis by manipulating the substrates of danger and safety learning in the brain (using a chemogenetic approach) and assessing the consequences for second-order fear to S2. Critically, silencing activity in the basolateral amygdala (important for danger learning) reduced fear to S2, whereas silencing activity in the infralimbic cortex (important for safety learning) enhanced fear to S2. These bidirectional changes are consistent with our hypothesis that second-order fear conditioning involves the formation of competing S2-danger and S2-safety associations. More generally, they show that a single set of experiences can produce contradictory associations and that the brain resolves the contradiction by encoding these associations in distinct brain regions.

The neural substrates of higher-order conditioning: A review

Sensory preconditioned and second-order conditioned responding are each well-documented. The former occurs in subjects (typically rats) exposed to pairings of two relatively neutral stimuli, S2 and S1, and then to pairings of S1 and a motivationally significant event [an unconditioned stimulus (US)]; the latter occurs when the order of these experiences is reversed with rats being exposed to S1-US pairings and then to S2-S1 pairings. In both cases, rats respond when tested with S2 in a manner appropriate to the affective nature of the US, e.g., approach when the US is appetitive and withdrawal when it is aversive. This paper reviews the neural substrates of sensory preconditioning and second-order conditioning. It identifies commonalities and differences in the substrates of these so-called higher-order conditioning protocols and discusses these commonalities/differences in relation to what is learned. In so doing, the review highlights ways in which these types of conditioning enhance our understanding of how the brain encodes and retrieves different types of information to generate appropriate behavior.

The Opioid Receptor Antagonist Naloxone Enhances First-Order Fear Conditioning, Second-Order Fear Conditioning and Sensory Preconditioning in Rats

The opioid receptor antagonist naloxone enhances Pavlovian fear conditioning when rats are exposed to pairings of an initially neutral stimulus, such as a tone, and a painful foot shock unconditioned stimulus (US; so-called first-order fear conditioning; Pavlov, 1927). The present series of experiments examined whether naloxone has the same effect when conditioning occurs in the absence of US exposure. In Experiments 1a and 1b, rats were exposed to tone-shock pairings in stage 1 (one trial per day for 4 days) and then to pairings of an initially neutral light with the already conditioned tone in stage 2 (one trial per day for 4 days). Experiment 1a confirmed that this training results in second-order fear of the light; and Experiment 1b showed that naloxone enhances this conditioning: rats injected with naloxone in stage 2 froze more than vehicle-injected controls when tested with the light alone (drug-free). In Experiments 2a and 2b, rats were exposed to light-tone pairings in stage 1 (one trial per day for 4 days) and then to tone-shock pairings in stage 2 (one trial per day for 2 days). Experiment 2a confirmed that this training results in sensory preconditioned fear of the light; and Experiment 2b showed that naloxone enhances sensory preconditioning when injected prior to each of the light-tone pairings: rats injected with naloxone in stage 1 froze more than vehicle-injected controls when tested with the light alone (drug-free). These results were taken to mean that naloxone enhances fear conditioning independently of its effect on US processing; and more generally, that opioids regulate the error-correction mechanisms that underlie associative formation.