Cecilia Forcato

Human reconsolidation does not always occur when a memory is retrieved: The relevance of the reminder structure

Memory reconsolidation is defined as a process in which the retrieval of a previously consolidated memory returns to a labile state which is then subject to stabilization. The reminder is the event that begins with the presentation of the learned cue and triggers the labilization-reconsolidation process. Since the early formulation of the hypothesis, several controversial items have arisen concerning the conditions that define reconsolidation. It is herein proposed that two diagnostic features characterize reconsolidation, namely: the labilization of the reactivated memory and the specificity of the reminder structure. To study this proposal, subjects received two different training sessions on verbal material on Day 1 and Day 2, respectively. Finally, they were tested for the first and second acquired memories on Day 3. It is demonstrated that the human declarative memory fulfills the two requirements that define the process. First, the reactivated memory is impaired by a new learning only when it is given closely after the reminder, revealing that the memory is labilized. Second, the omission of at least one of the reminders components prevents labilization. Therefore, results show that the new learning fails to produce an amnesic effect on the target memory either when the reminder omits the learned cue or includes the beginning of the reinforcement.

Reconsolidation in humans opens up declarative memory to the entrance of new information

A consolidated memory recalled by a reminder enters a vulnerability phase (labilization), followed by a process of stabilization (reconsolidation). Several authors have suggested that the labilization of the consolidated memory makes the incorporation of new information possible. Here, we demonstrate updating in the framework of memory declarative reconsolidation in humans by giving an opportune verbal instruction. Volunteers learn an association between five cue-syllables (L1) and their respective response-syllables. Twenty-four hours later, the paired-associate verbal memory is labilized by exposing the subjects to the reminder, and then they receive the verbal Instruction of adding three new cue-response syllables (INFO) with their respective responses to the former list of five. The new information is incorporated into the single former L1-memory and both INFO and L1 are successfully retrieved on the third day. However, when the Instruction is not preceded by a proper reminder, or when the instruction omits the order of adding the INFO into the former L1-memory, we observed interference in retrieval of both the original and the new information, suggesting that they are encoded independently and coexist as separate memories.

Classical conditioning in the vegetative and minimally conscious state

Pavlovian trace conditioning depends on the temporal gap between the conditioned and unconditioned stimuli. It requires, in mammals, functional medial temporal lobe structures and, in humans, explicit knowledge of the temporal contingency. It is therefore considered to be a plausible objective test to assess awareness without relying on explicit reports. We found that individuals with disorders of consciousness (DOCs), despite being unable to report awareness explicitly, were able to learn this procedure. Learning was specific and showed an anticipatory electromyographic response to the aversive conditioning stimulus, which was substantially stronger than to the control stimulus and was augmented as the aversive stimulus approached. The amount of learning correlated with the degree of cortical atrophy and was a good indicator of recovery. None of these effects were observed in control subjects under the effect of anesthesia (propofol). Our results suggest that individuals with DOCs might have partially preserved conscious processing, which cannot be mediated by explicit reports and is not detected by behavioral assessment.

Assessing level of consciousness and cognitive changes from vegetative state to full recovery

Although investigations addressing cognitive recovery from the vegetative state have been reported, to date there have been no detailed studies of these patients combining both neuropsychology and functional imaging to monitor and record the recovery of consciousness. This paper describes the recovery of a specific vegetative state (VS) case. The patient (OG) remained in the vegetative state for approximately two months, increasing her level of awareness to a minimally conscious state, where she continued for approximately 70 days. In the course of the ensuing 18 months, she was able to reach an acceptable level of cognitive functioning, with partial levels of independence. Throughout this two year period, she received continuous cognitive evaluation, for which several different tools were applied including coma and low functioning scales, full cognitive batteries, and structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We present here preliminary data on fMRI using a word presentation paradigm before and after recovery; we also discuss the difficulty of how to determine level of consciousness using the tools currently available, and the subsequent improvement in different cognitive domains. We confirm that accurate diagnosis and proper cognitive assessment are critical for the rehabilitation of patients with disorders of consciousness.

Repeated labilization-reconsolidation processes strengthen declarative memory in humans.

The idea that memories are immutable after consolidation has been challenged. Several reports have shown that after the presentation of a specific reminder, reactivated old memories become labile and again susceptible to amnesic agents. Such vulnerability diminishes with the progress of time and implies a re-stabilization phase, usually referred to as reconsolidation. To date, the main findings describe the mechanisms associated with the labilization-reconsolidation process, but little is known about its functionality from a biological standpoint. Indeed, two functions have been proposed. One suggests that destabilization of the original memory after the reminder allows the integration of new information into the background of the original memory (memory updating), and the other suggests that the labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens the original memory (memory strengthening). We have previously reported the reconsolidation of human declarative memories, demonstrating memory updating in the framework of reconsolidation. Here we deal with the strengthening function attributed to the reconsolidation process. We triggered labilization-reconsolidation processes successively by repeated presentations of the proper reminder. Participants learned an association between five cue-syllables and their respective response-syllables. Twenty-four hours later, the paired-associate verbal memory was labilized by exposing the subjects to one, two or four reminders. The List-memory was evaluated on Day 3 showing that the memory was improved when at least a second reminder was presented in the time window of the first labilization-reconsolidation process prompted by the earlier reminder. However, the improvement effect was revealed on Day 3, only when at least two reminders were presented on Day2 and not as a consequence of only retrieval. Therefore, we propose central concepts for the reconsolidation process, emphasizing its biological role and the parametrical constrains for this function to be operative.

The Role and Dynamic of Strengthening in the Reconsolidation Process in a Human Declarative Memory: What Decides the Fate of Recent and Older Memories?

Several reports have shown that after specific reminders are presented, consolidated memories pass from a stable state to one in which the memory is reactivated. This reactivation implies that memories are labile and susceptible to amnesic agents. This susceptibility decreases over time and leads to a re-stabilization phase usually known as reconsolidation. With respect to the biological role of reconsolidation, two functions have been proposed. First, the reconsolidation process allows new information to be integrated into the background of the original memory; second, it strengthens the original memory. We have previously demonstrated that both of these functions occur in the reconsolidation of human declarative memories. Our paradigm consisted of learning verbal material (lists of five pairs of nonsense syllables) acquired by a training process (L1-training) on Day 1 of our experiment. After this declarative memory is consolidated, it can be made labile by presenting a specific reminder. After this, the memory passes through a subsequent stabilization process. Strengthening creates a new scenario for the reconsolidation process; this function represents a new factor that may transform the dynamic of memories. First, we analyzed whether the repeated labilization-reconsolidation processes maintained the memory for longer periods of time. We showed that at least one labilization-reconsolidation process strengthens a memory via evaluation 5 days after its re-stabilization. We also demonstrated that this effect is not triggered by retrieval only. We then analyzed the way strengthening modified the effect of an amnesic agent that was presented immediately after repeated labilizations. The repeated labilization-reconsolidation processes made the memory more resistant to interference during re-stabilization. Finally, we evaluated whether the effect of strengthening may depend on the age of the memory. We found that the effect of strengthening did depend on the age of the memory. Forgetting may represent a process that weakens the effect of strengthening.

The dynamic nature of the reconsolidation process and its boundary conditions: Evidence based on human tests.

The reconsolidation process is the mechanism by which the strength and/or content of consolidated memories are updated. This process is triggered by the presentation of a reminder (training cues). It is not always possible to trigger the reconsolidation process. For example, memory age and strength are boundary conditions for the reconsolidation process. Here, we investigated the dynamic changes in these conditions. We propose that the boundary conditions of the reconsolidation process are not fixed and vary as a consequence of the interaction between memory features and reminder characteristics. To modify memory properties, participants received a threatening social protocol that improves memory acquisition or a control condition (fake, without social interaction) prior to learning pairs of meaningless syllables. To determine whether a strong young or old declarative memory undergoes the reconsolidation process, we used an interference task (a second list of pairs of meaningless syllables) to disrupt memory re-stabilization. To assess whether the older memory could be strengthened, we repeated the triggering of reconsolidation. Strong young or old memories modulated by a threatening experience could be interfered during reconsolidation and updated (strengthened) by reconsolidation. Rather than being fixed, boundary conditions vary according to the memory features (strong memory), which indicates the dynamic nature of the reconsolidation process. Our findings demonstrate that it is possible to modify these limits by recruiting the reconsolidation process and making it functionally operative again. This novel scenario opens the possibility to new therapeutically approaches that take into account the reconsolidation process.

Differential Left Hippocampal Activation during Retrieval with Different Types of Reminders: An fMRI Study of the Reconsolidation Process.

Consolidated memories return to a labile state after the presentation of cues (reminders) associated with acquisition, followed by a period of stabilization (reconsolidation). However not all cues are equally effective in initiating the process, unpredictable cues triggered it, predictable cues do not. We hypothesize that the different effects observed by the different reminder types on memory labilization-reconsolidation depend on a differential neural involvement during reminder presentation. To test it, we developed a declarative task and compared the efficacy of three reminder types in triggering the process in humans (Experiment 1). Finally, we compared the brain activation patterns between the different conditions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) (Experiment 2). We confirmed that the unpredictable reminder is the most effective in initiating the labilization-reconsolidation process. Furthermore, only under this condition there was differential left hippocampal activation during its presentation. We suggest that the left hippocampus is detecting the incongruence between actual and past events and allows the memory to be updated.

Interference Conditions of the Reconsolidation Process in Humans: The Role of Valence and Different Memory Systems

Following the presentation of a reminder, consolidated memories become reactivated followed by a process of re-stabilization, which is referred to as reconsolidation. The most common behavioral tool used to reveal this process is interference produced by new learning shortly after memory reactivation. Memory interference is defined as a decrease in memory retrieval, the effect is generated when new information impairs an acquired memory. In general, the target memory and the interference task used are the same. Here we investigated how different memory systems and/or their valence could produce memory reconsolidation interference. We showed that a reactivated neutral declarative memory could be interfered by new learning of a different neutral declarative memory. Then, we revealed that an aversive implicit memory could be interfered by the presentation of a reminder followed by a threatening social event. Finally, we showed that the reconsolidation of a neutral declarative memory is unaffected by the acquisition of an aversive implicit memory and conversely, this memory remains intact when the neutral declarative memory is used as interference. These results suggest that the interference of memory reconsolidation is effective when two task rely on the same memory system or both evoke negative valence.

Positive modulation of a neutral declarative memory by a threatening social event.

Memories can be altered by negative or arousing experiences due to the activation of the stress-responsive sympatho-adrenal-medullary axis (SYM). Here, we used a neutral declarative memory that was acquired during multi-trial training to determine the effect of a threatening event on memory without emotional valence. To this end, participants received a new threatening social protocol before learning pairs of meaningless syllables and were tested either 15 min, 2 days or 8 days after acquisition. We first demonstrated that this threatening social situation activates not only the SYM axis (Experiment 1) and the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA; Experiment 2), but also, it improves the acquisition or early consolidation of the syllable pairs (Experiment 3). This improvement is not a transient effect; it can be observed after the memory is consolidated. Furthermore, this modulation increases the persistence of memory (Experiment 4). Thus, it is possible to affect memories with specific events that contain unrelated content and a different valence.