Memory processes can be profoundly affected by life experiences. In particular, stress has proved to be a major modulator of memory function.^1–4 However, we should bear in mind that stress is an extremely wide concept that ranges from situations that require moderate adaptations from the individual to circumstances that can be overwhelmingly adverse and persistent.

As can be expected, the impacts of such diverse stressful experiences on cognitive functions are not the same. Whereas moderate stress experienced during learning can facilitate information storage,^5–7 experiencing excessive stress acutely or severe stress chronically can be highly detrimental to memory function. Moreover, substantial evidence indicates that there are important time-windows during the lifespan when experiencing stress can exert an impact on later life including detrimental consequences for cognitive performance during aging. How the two latter stress conditions (chronic stress experienced in adulthood and the developmental effects of stress on the aging process) affect memory function will be the focus of the first part of this chapter.

The second part will deal with memory alterations that characterize the aging period. In both parts, phenomenological descriptions of cognitive alterations will be followed by sections dealing with major mechanisms that have been implicated in mediating the described effects of stress or aging.

12.1. STRESS

12.1.2. Physiological Stress Response

The stress response involves a complex reaction in the organism that, in addition to the activation of peripheral stress systems, includes the activation of specific circuits in the brain. Most of these neural circuits have the capacity not only of processing information, but also eventually affect the degree and direction of activation of peripheral physiological systems.¹² As to the peripheral responses, the two major systems activated during stress are the sympathetic (SNS) branch of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and the neuroendocrine system consisting of the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenocortical (HPA) axis.

12.1.2.1. Sympathetic Nervous System

Unlike the parasympathetic branch of the ANS that mediates calm vegetative functions such as growth, digestion, and relaxing responses of the organism, the SNS is stimulated by activating and stressful situations. This system comprises a number of projections that connect with virtually every organ in the body where they secrete norepinephrine.

An important projection of the SNS is its input to the medulla of the adrenal glands, where adrenaline and noradrenaline hormones are secreted into the bloodstream. Many well-known responses to stress are caused by activation of the SNS, including increased heart rate and blood pressure, increased glucose levels, increased muscle tension, and increased sweating. In parallel, activation of the SNS delays functions that are not directly required to survive at that particular moment; typical examples are the lessening or suspension of digestion and reproduction.

12.1.2.2. Hypothalamus–Pituitary–Adrenal Axis

Most of the work examining the deleterious effects of stress on memory function has focused on the HPA axis (Figure 12.1). This neuroendocrine system involves the sequential activation of messenger molecules produced by the hypothalamus, the pituitary, and the adrenal cortex. The main hypothalamic HPA messengers, corticotrophin releasing hormone (CRH) and vasopressin (AVP), are synthesized in the paraventricular nucleus. Upon the appropriate stimulus, these peptides are released and, through the portal vein system, get access to the anterior pituitary where they stimulate the production and release of the adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) into the bloodstream. Eventually, ACTH reaches the adrenal cortex where it stimulates the secretion and production of glucocorticoids (cortisol in humans; corticosterone in a variety of animals including rodents).

FIGURE 12.1

The hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis. Activation of the hypothalamus results in a chain of events that eventually result in the release of glucocorticoids. Once in the bloodstream, these steroid hormones exert negative feedback at the (more...)

Glucocorticoids are steroid hormones that produce extensive effects on virtually all physiological systems. Among their many roles, they exert essential feedback actions at a variety of levels (prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, hypothalamus, and pituitary) to inhibit the activity of the axis. Such negative feedback is crucial to suppress excessive levels of these steroids, whose brief action can be highly adaptive, but their maintenance at high levels for prolonged periods can be highly detrimental to an organism.

Due to their lipophilic nature, glucocorticoids can achieve rapid access to the brain. In addition to rapid nongenomic actions through membrane receptors, glucocorticoids affect the brain by acting through two classical intracellular corticosteroid receptors that exert genomic effects.¹³ They are the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) and the glucocorticoid receptor (GR). Corticosterone binds with a 10-fold higher affinity to MRs than to GRs and therefore it is not surprising that many stress effects are mediated through GRs. The hippocampus shows the highest density of corticosteroid receptors, with some amygdala nuclei and the prefrontal cortex also showing moderate to high levels of GRs.¹

12.1.3. Stress and Memory Function

As noted above, stress covers a wide spectrum of circumstances that can eventually have differential effects in the acquisition, consolidation, and retrieval of information. Based on the importance for mental health of the negative effects that highly stressful circumstances can impinge on cognitive function, the focus of this chapter is on the detrimental effects of stress on memory processes.^3,4,6,14 For reviews on the positive aspects of moderate brief stress periods on memory formation, see References ^{5, 7}, and ¹⁵. A number of important factors related to stress and cognition must be taken into account when trying to understand how stress affects cognitive function. The following parameters are particularly important.

12.1.3.1. Stress Magnitude and Intensity

Intuitively, the impacts of extreme stressors (such as a real life threat, for example, a strong earthquake) on cognitive function are expected to differ greatly from those impinged by moderate stressors (such as exposure to novelty), and experimental evidence largely supports this view.^16,17 In any case, it is important to note the drastic individual differences in stress reactivity existing among conspecifics. Therefore, when evaluating the impact of stress intensity, it is advisable to take into account both the specific characteristics of the stressor and measure individual behavioral and physiological responses in order to determine the actual stress magnitude experienced by each experimental subject.

12.1.3.2. Stressor Timing

The time when stress is experienced with regard to the cognitive function under evaluation seems to be a crucial factor of both the types of effects observed and the mechanisms implicated.¹⁷ Depending on whether stress is experienced before, during, or after the cognitive challenge, different processes (acquisition, consolidation, and/or retrieval of information) can be affected. Consistent evidence indicates that acute stress exerts different effects on consolidation (frequently facilitating) and retrieval (frequently impairing) of information.^5–7,17

12.1.3.3. Stressor Duration

As we will see in the following sections, taking into account the duration of the stressor is essential, particularly when the question under analysis is related to the mechanisms whereby stress impairs cognitive function. We will review the experimental work that illustrates impaired memory function following either acute or chronic stress (see below).

12.1.3.4. Stressor Controllability

Substantial work in humans and animals indicates that an individual’s perception of his or her ability to cope with a stressful experience has profound consequences on the degree of cognitive alteration induced by stress. Uncontrollable stressors generally provoke more behavioral impairments than controllable stressors, and many neurochemical changes ordinarily elicited by uncontrollable stressors are not observed when control is possible.^10,11,18 However, recent evidence suggests that the different impacts produced by controllable and uncontrollable stressors in the brain may not be due simply to the contribution of uncontrollability, but may in fact be affected by the ability to control. By using a triadic design (see Figure 12.2), the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) was proposed to inhibit stress-induced neural activity in brainstem nuclei (notably, the dorsal raphe nucleus) in individuals who exerted control over stress in contrast to the prior view that such brainstem activity was induced by the lack of control.¹⁹

FIGURE 12.2

Cartoon representing classic triadic design used to evaluate behavioral and physiological impacts of exposure to controllable or uncontrollable stress in rats. The design involves three groups. Two were submitted to stress (electric shocks in the tail) (more...)

In addition to the memory phase under study (see Section 12.1.3.2, “Stressor Timing”), other factors are also important to take into account with regard to the cognitive function under study.

12.1.3.5. Factors Related to Memory Processes

As mentioned above, not all phases in the information process related to memory function are equally susceptible to disruption by stress. It is, therefore, very important to design experiments that allow one to establish which memory phase (acquisition, consolidation, retrieval, or even reconsolidation) is affected by the stress procedure under study (Figure 12.3).

FIGURE 12.3

Depiction of the importance of the timing when stress is experienced with regard to the phase of information processing under study. If stress is given before acquisition of information (1), it can potentially affect all cognitive phases involved in memory (more...)

Another particularly important factor is the type of learning process evaluated (i.e., implicit/procedural explicit/declarative, nonassociative learning, etc). Notably, implicit memory processes have been shown to be positively influenced by stress.^20,21 Both acute^20–22 and chronic^23–25 stress experiences were reported to potentiate associative types of learning such as eyeblink conditioning and fear conditioning in male (but not female²⁰) rodents. On the contrary, explicit/declarative/relational types of memories are much more vulnerable to interference by stress. Since this chapter covers the detrimental effects of stress on memory, we will mainly focus on these latter types of memory that have been shown to be particularly vulnerable to alteration by stress.

12.1.5. Neurobiological Mechanisms Involved in Acute Effects of Stress on Memory

Cognitive and neurobiological studies have provided converging evidence that the hippocampus is critically involved in long-term memory formation^37–39 and also a primary central nervous system target of stress hormones.^2,6 The great sensitivity of the hippocampus to stress is revealed by the profound suppression of hippocampal synaptic plasticity after acute exposure to stressors^40–44 or increased glucocorticoids.⁴⁴ Moreover, adrenergic activation in the basolateral amygdala and hippocampus was shown to be critical for the impairing effects of glucocorticoids on delayed memory retrieval in spatial water maze tasks.⁴⁵

A crucial role for the medial temporal lobe (and the hippocampus in particular) in mediating these stress-induced retrieval impairments is also supported by human neuroimaging studies.³³ Specifically, de Quervain et al.³³ used positron emission tomography (PET) to investigate the effects of pharmacologically increased glucocorticoid levels in regional cerebral blood flow during declarative memory retrieval in healthy male humans. A single stress-level dose of cortisone (25 mg) given 1 hour before testing impaired cued recall of word pairs learned 24 hours earlier but did not significantly affect performance in other tasks such as verbal recognition, semantic generation, and categorization. Simultaneously, this treatment resulted in a large decrease in regional cerebral blood flow in a number of brain areas including the right posterior medial temporal lobe, left visual cortex, and cerebellum. The decrease in the right posterior medial temporal lobe was maximal in the parahippocampal gyrus, a region associated with successful verbal memory retrieval.

In addition to the hippocampus, evidence indicates that acute stress-induced memory impairing effects can also be mediated by activation of dopaminergic^46,47 and noradrenergic⁴⁸ transmission in other structures known to be involved in high-order (including working memory and executive function) processing such as the prefrontal cortex (PFC).

Only a few studies have been reported on potential molecular mechanisms whereby stress could lead to less effective functioning of neural networks during retrieval. Recently, the potential role of the neural cell adhesion molecule (NCAM) was investigated in a rat model of stress-induced retrieval deficits in the RAWM by cat stress.⁴⁹ NCAM (see Figure 12.4) is a part of a family of cell surface glycoproteins that play key roles in neural development and in synaptic plasticity in the adult brain.^50–52 Encoded by a single gene, the three main isoforms derived by alternative splicing are NCAM-120, NCAM-140, and NCAM-180 according to their approximate molecular weights. In addition to playing roles in cell–cell recognition and synapse stabilization, NCAM also participates in neurite outgrowth, activation of signal transduction cascades, and synapse formation and elimination.^53,54 Moreover, NCAM has been implicated in the induction of hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP; a physiological model of memory) and in memory formation.^50–52 Finally, these molecules have been shown to be sensitive to stress.⁴

FIGURE 12.4

Cell adhesion molecules of the immunoglobulin superfamily NCAM and L1. Left: the molecular structures of these molecules are represented. NCAM has three major isoforms that differ in molecular weight and type of attachment to cell membranes. Right: two (more...)

In the cat stress study,⁴⁹ rats were trained to locate a hidden platform and then during a 30-min delay period they were either left undisturbed or exposed to a cat, after which all animals were given retention trials and brain samples [hippocampus, basolateral amygdala (BLA), PFC, and cerebellum] were extracted immediately afterward to assess for NCAM levels in synaptosomal preparations. Two other control groups were included: a group of undisturbed rats submitted only to handling and a swim control group that was exposed to the maze but not to spatial learning. The platform location changed from trial to trial.

NCAM expression in the hippocampus was not altered in animals with intact spatial memories that were not stressed. However, predator exposure impaired spatial memory and dramatically reduced NCAM levels in the hippocampus (particularly the NCAM-180 isoform) and PFC (although specificity of the PFC effect is questioned since reduced NCAM levels were also found in trained but unstressed animals and in the swim control group). No significant changes in NCAM levels were observed in the amygdala or cerebellum. These observations of drastic reductions of NCAM in stressed memory-impaired rats is consistent with an increasing body of data indicating that hippocampal NCAM is important for long-term memory formation.^55–58 The drastic suppression of hippocampal NCAM levels found in the hippocampus after rat stress may also contribute to impaired long-term consolidation and/or retrieval processes of spatial memory.

12.1.6. Impairing Effects of Chronic Stress on Cognitive Function

Prolonged exposure to stress is now recognized as a condition that can induce deleterious effects on brain structure and cognition^2,59,60 and increase the risks of developing neuropsychiatric disorders.^61,62 Since most of the pioneer work in the field focused on the hippocampus as a primary target of stress actions,^2,63,64 the possibility that chronic stress affects hippocampal-dependent learning has been extensively tested. Chronically stressed male rats were shown to exhibit learning and memory deficits in a variety of spatial tasks including the radial-arm maze,⁶⁵ the Y maze,⁶⁶ the radial-arm water maze,⁶⁷ and the Morris water maze.^57,68

Evidence from the animal and human literature supports the existence of considerable variability in the vulnerability to stress among conspecific individuals.^69–72 Numerous studies have reported important individual differences in the impact exerted by stress in learning, memory, and retrieval processes.^70–73 While some individuals are particularly vulnerable, others may be resistant to the effects of stress. These differences may be due to predisposing factors, to previous life experiences or, more likely, to both. Given the devastating consequences that stress impinges in susceptible individuals, developing tools able to predict which individuals are in particular danger would be of great value for developing more effective strategies to prevent and/or reverse the effects of adverse life periods. Three types of factors have been identified as particularly important in influencing an individual’s susceptibility to develop cognitive alterations under chronic stress: (1) certain personality traits; (2) gender; and (3) age.

12.1.6.1. Personality Traits

The level of locomotor activity displayed by rats in a novel environment has been identified as an accurate index to categorize individuals with relevant psychobiological profiles.^74,75 By exposing rats to novelty, it is possible to classify them in groups, one comprising those that exhibit a high locomotor activity (high-responding or HR) and another including those that present low levels of activity (low-responding or LR). See Figure 12.5. This behavioral trait of novelty reactivity in rats has been proposed to resemble some of the features of high-sensation seekers in humans.⁷⁶

FIGURE 12.5

One of the classic experimental procedures used to characterize animals on the behavioral trait of novelty reactivity. Animals were exposed to a novel environment (open field is depicted in the figure; circular corridors are classically used) and their (more...)

Individual differences in reactivity to novelty in adult male rats have been related to differences in susceptibility to develop cognitive alterations after exposure to chronic stress.⁷⁷ Specifically, when 4-month old LR and HR Wistar male rats were submitted to psychosocial stress for 21 days (daily cohabitation of each young adult rat with a new middle-aged rat), HR, but not LR, rats subsequently showed marked deficits in spatial learning in the water maze.

Anxiety trait is a well-known risk factor for the development of stress-related neuropsychiatric disorders, like depression in humans,^78,79 and it has been associated with degrees of cognitive impairment following chronic stress in rodents. Specifically, peripubertal anxiety levels of male rats (as evaluated using open field and elevated plus mazes at 43 days of age) were shown to be predictive of the detrimental effects of chronic restraint stress (21 days) on hippocampal-dependent spatial memory as assessed in young adulthood (75 days). Memory was tested on the spatial Y-maze using two inter-trial interval levels of difficulty (1 min or 4 hours). No differences among groups were observed in the less difficult 1-min version of the Y-maze. However, in the 4-hour version of the Y-maze, chronically stressed high anxiety rats — but not the other groups — showed impaired spatial memory. Moreover, a month after the chronic stress ended, high anxiety rats had significantly higher basal corticosterone levels than low anxiety rats (control and stress). In fact, anxiety trait in rats was also found to predict impaired spatial learning performance in the stressful water maze task under acute conditions⁸⁰ that highlight anxious individuals as particularly prone to show cognitive deficits under stressful conditions.

12.1.6.2. Gender

The importance of gender on the effects of stress in cognition remained elusive until recently due to the routine use of only male rodents in behavioral studies. However, intensive work over the past few years involving female rodents shows that gender is indeed a critical factor in an individual’s susceptibility to chronic stress.^81,82

When both male and female rats were submitted to chronic stress procedures (such as 21 days of chronic restraint stress), males were impaired in all tasks in which they were tested (novel object recognition and two spatial memory tasks: object placement and radial arm maze), while females were either enhanced (spatial memory tasks) or not impaired (nonspatial memory tasks).⁸³ As indicated below, age seems to be an important factor in the modulatory role of gender in stress and memory interactions.

12.1.6.3. Age

Age has been identified as a critical factor in the interactions between stress and cognition from two main perspectives. One is related to a differential susceptibility to stress that is manifested by some individuals at different times across the life span. The second relates to the impact that experiencing stress at a particular life period might have in future cognitive functioning.

With regard to the first perspective, aging has been clearly identified in male rats as a risk factor for developing stress-induced cognitive impairments. A pioneer study by Bodnoff et al.⁸⁴ in young adult and mid-aged male rats showed that mid-aged rats were more vulnerable to the effects of chronic corticosterone administration. Three months of steroid treatment at doses sufficient to mimic the elevated hormone levels observed following exposure to mild stress induced learning impairments in the mid-aged but not young, rats in the Morris water maze. Mid-aged rats exposed for 6 months to high social stress were also pronouncedly impaired in spatial learning. This effect was prevented by adrenalectomy. This and related findings^85,86 (see below) highlight midlife as a time of particular sensitivity to the effects of chronic stress and corticosteroid hormones.

Interestingly, the effects of aging seem to be gender-dependent. A recent review of the literature⁸² pointed out that whereas the impairing effects of stress on male rodents are observed across the whole lifespan, females show more variable responses to stress. Stress-induced facilitations observed in females in young adulthood were not further observed following stress exposure at old age.⁸²

The second perspective implies that exposure to stress at a particular life period may have long-term and/or delayed consequences in memory function. Early life experiences are known to exert profound influences in stress reactivity in adulthood and cognitive aging.^62,87 Much work has been done with early postnatal stress manipulations^88–91 which, in addition to affecting other behavioral and physiological aspects in later adulthood, consistently resulted in learning and memory deficits in hippocampus-dependent tasks such as the water maze.

Interestingly, a recent study has presented evidence that some consequences of early-life stressful experiences may not be manifested during young adulthood, then become apparent later during midlife. Brunson et al.⁹² explored whether psychological early-life stress in rats caused an enduring deterioration of hippocampal function that worsened from young adulthood to middle age. To induce stress, environment and maternal behavior were altered by placing pups and dams in cages with limited nesting and bedding material on postnatal days 2 to 9. This resulted in abnormal nurturing behavior in the dams including reduced and fragmented nursing and grooming of pups. The selection of such procedure was based on its ability to produce substantial neuroendocrine changes early in life⁹³ that become fully normalized by adulthood.⁹² Although the offspring showed virtually normal cognitive function during young adulthood (4 to 5 months of age), they were severely impaired in hippocampus-dependent tasks (spatial learning in the water maze and novel object recognition) at mid-age (12 months). The authors suggested that stress during periods of hippocampal development may permanently influence hippocampal systems that are particularly vulnerable during these periods.^89,94

Substantial work indicates that lifetime exposure to stress can also affect cognitive function at aging. This is discussed in detail below, after the next section that provides a general overview on the main neurobiological mechanisms that have been implicated in the deleterious actions of chronic stress on memory function.

12.1.7. Neurobiological Mechanisms Involved in Deleterious Effects of Chronic Stress on Brain and Behavior

First, it is important to note that the mechanisms whereby chronic stress impairs cognitive function are not necessarily the same as the ones mediating acute stress effects. While neural alterations involved in acute stress effects seem to be mainly mediated by dynamic functional alterations among cellular and molecular interactions, chronic stress is now known to have a major impact on both functional aspects and neuronal structures. In this section, the main structural and functional effects of chronic stress on specific neural circuits will be discussed, followed by an overview of the molecular processes reported to contribute to such effects.

12.1.7.1. Structural Effects of Chronic Stress

Because many examples in the literature indicating impairing effects of chronic stress in memory processes were obtained in hippocampus-dependent tasks, the hippocampus is the brain region that has received the most attention. However, intensive work during the past few years is providing increasing evidence for a more integral impact of chronic stress throughout the brain that, as illustrated below, is now documented to a certain extent at the level of the prefrontal cortex and amygdala.

Hippocampus

The hippocampus plays a central role in memory processes,^39,95 particularly in spatial learning which is generally affected by stress manipulations.⁹⁶ In humans, neuroimaging studies have reported hippocampal atrophy in association with stress- and glucocorticoid-related cognitive and neuropsychiatric alterations.^97–99 In rodents, the CA3 subregion appears to be particularly vulnerable to the effects of chronic stress. In rats subjected to stress for 3 to 4 weeks, CA3 has been reported to experience the following structural alterations:

• Dendritic atrophy of apical CA3 pyramidal neurons^100,101 (Figure 12.6)
• A striking reorganization within mossy fiber terminals¹⁰²
• Synaptic loss of excitatory glutamatergic synapses^57,103
• A reduction in the surface area of postsynaptic densities¹⁰³
• A marked retraction of thorny excrescences¹⁰⁴

FIGURE 12.6

Structural effects of chronic stress in the hippocampus and amygdala. Different hippocampal subregions can be markedly affected by exposure to chronic stress. The upper part of the figure represents the stress-induced atrophy of apical dendrites in CA3 (more...)

Although stress-induced alterations in CA1 morphology are not as drastic as those occurring in CA3, some changes have also been reported in this hippocampal subregion (particularly in excitatory axospinous synaptic connectivity in rat CA1 stratum lacunosum moleculare) after stressing rats for 3 to 4 weeks. These changes include:

• Alterations in the lengths of the terminal dendritic segments of pyramidal cells in rat CA1¹⁰³
• Increases in postsynaptic density surface area and volume in CA1 stratum lacunosum moleculare¹⁰⁵
• An overall reduction of the dorsal anterior CA1 area volume¹⁰⁵

In addition, stress and high glucocorticoid levels can suppress neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus¹⁰⁶ (Figure 12.6). Furthermore, stress can compromise cell survival and eventually lead to overt neuronal loss by exacerbating the neurotoxicity induced by other hippocampal insults.¹⁰⁷

Prefrontal cortex

The prefrontal cortex (PFC), particularly its medial part (mPFC), is critically involved in higher cognitive processes and in the integration of cognitive and emotionally relevant information.^108–110 Moreover, the PFC contains high levels of glucocorticoid receptors^111,112 and is also involved in the regulation of stress-induced hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) activity.¹¹³ Clinical evidence highlights mPFC as a core alteration in a wide variety of neuropsychiatric disorders.^114,115

Rodent studies have provided evidence that major neuronal remodeling occurs in the mPFC as a consequence of repeated exposure to chronic stress or repeated glucocorticoid treatment. Chronic stress also results in major changes in layer II/III of the PFC following 21 days of repeated stress:

• Dendritic atrophy: decrease of total length^116,117 and number¹¹⁶ of apical dendrites from pyramidal neurons.
• Spine loss: a decrease in apical dendritic spine density. It is estimated that nearly one-third of all axospinous synapses on apical dendrites of pyramidal neurons in medial PFC are lost following repeated stress.¹¹⁸

Glucocorticoids seem to be major players in the remodeling induced by stress in the mPFC. Rats chronically treated (4 weeks) with either corticosterone (25 mg/kg) or dexamethasone, a synthetic glucocorticoid (300 μg/kg), showed neuronal loss and atrophy of layer II of the infralimbic, prelimbic, and cingulate cortices.¹¹⁹ Moreover, morphological studies have established that chronic daily corticosterone injections (3 weeks) in rats resulted in dendritic reorganization in pyramidal neurons in layer II-III of the mPFC,¹²⁰ with major changes observed in apical arbors consisting of increased dendritic material proximal to the soma and decreased dendritic material distal to the soma.

Amygdala

The amygdala plays key role in emotional behavior and especially in fear.¹²¹ It is not yet clear whether this structure is involved in the deleterious effects of stress in memory function since amygdala-dependent memories such as fear conditioning are potentiated by chronic stress.^23,24

Strikingly, the structural alterations that have been observed in the amygdala contrast with the dendritic atrophy observed in the hippocampus or PFC. Repeated exposure of rats to restraint stress (10 days) induced enhanced dendritic branching of pyramidal and stellate neurons in the BLA¹²² (Figure 12.6). This effect was dependent on the stressor used, since no changes were observed in these neuronal types following a chronic unpredictable stress procedure that, instead, induced atrophy only in BLA bipolar neurons.¹²² Moreover, the restraint procedure also resulted in increased spine density across primary and secondary branches of spiny neurons in the BLA.¹²³

Further studies are needed to confirm whether sensitization of amygdala activation occurring as a consequence of sustained stress exposure may also be an important component of the reported memory impairments in more explicit types of memories.

12.1.7.2. Effects of Chronic Stress on Synaptic Plasticity

Electrophysiological experiments have consistently shown impaired synaptic plasticity following chronic stress, indicative of functional consequences on neural circuits of the structural alterations described above. Thus, long-term potentiation (LTP) is impaired in different hippocampal areas including CA1,^124,125 the commissural/associational (but not mossy fiber) input to CA3,¹²⁶ and the dentate gyrus.¹²⁴ Likewise, treating rats chronically with corticosterone was found to impair hippocampal synaptic potentiation.^84,127 Moreover, evidence indicates stress-inducing changes in LTP in the mPFC–amygdala pathway.¹²⁸

Interestingly, early-life stress can also result in late-onset hippocampal dysfunction. Early-life stress in rats causes a decline in a number of measures of synaptic function and plasticity (LTP in CA1 and CA3 hippocampal subregions) when evaluated at mid-age (12 months).⁹²

12.1.7.3. Molecular Alterations Induced by Chronic Stress

A number of molecular mechanisms seem to participate in the deleterious effects induced by stress in brain structure and cognitive function. Certain neurotransmitters, signal transduction pathways, neurotrophic factors, and adhesion molecules have been implicated in the effects of chronic stress on the brain.^{4,5,59,107,129}

Excitatory amino acids

Alterations in glutamatergic transmission have been proposed to result in an excitotoxic cascade of mechanisms finally leading to neuronal endangerment and/or neurotoxicity.¹⁰⁷ In line with evidence that stress and glucocorticoids increase glutamate levels in the hippocampus and other brain regions,^130–132 glutamate has been involved in the deleterious effects of stress and corticosterone on hippocampal structure.^100,101 Furthermore, increased NMDA and decreased AMPA receptor density have been reported in the hippocampus after exposure to stress.^133–135 In parallel, NMDA-mediated synaptic responses were found to be increased after chronic stress.¹³⁶

Neurotrophic factors

Changes in neurotrophin levels have been hypothesized to play a key role in stress-induced neuronal damage. Hippocampal BDNF is reduced both by stress and glucocorticoid¹³⁷ treatments. Conversely, fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) expression was shown to be increased after both stress and glucocorticoid treatments, which might represent a neuroprotective mechanism to preserve neuronal viability in challenging situations.¹²⁹

Moreover, stress can influence intracellular transduction pathways involved in neurotrophin receptor signaling as shown for Ras-MAP kinase cascades^138,139 that play critical roles in synaptic plasticity and neuronal survival. Chronically stressed rats also showed severe and lasting hyperphosphorylation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinases ERK1 and ERK2 involved in the Ras–MAP kinase pathway, along with a decrease in phospho-CREB expression in a number of areas including the hippocampus.^138,140 Interestingly, phosphorylated CREB modulates the transcription of several genes that code for molecules involved in neuronal plasticity including tyrosine hydroxylase, BDNF, and NCAM.

Cell adhesion molecules

Chronic stress can markedly affect the expression of cell adhesion molecules in the hippocampus. Exposure of rats to chronic stress for 21 days has been reported to result in:

• Reduced mRNA and protein expression NCAM in the hippocampus.^24,68 Although the expression of the mRNA coding for the NCAM-180 isoform was not altered,⁶⁸ chronic stress specifically reduced NCAM-140 protein expression.^77,141 Moreover, a milder but widespread decrease in NCAM mRNA levels was observed across other brain areas.⁶⁸
• Post-translational modification of NCAM with -2,8-linked polysialic acid (PSA) is also profoundly affected by chronic stress that increases its hippocampal expression²⁴ in the dentate gyrus.¹⁴² In addition to its role in cell–cell de-adhesion, PSA-NCAM has been associated with newly generated cells¹⁴³ since this post-translational modification of PSA-NCAM contributes to the migration of new progenitors and neurons. However, because chronic stress actually decreases cell proliferation in the dentate gyrus, the PSA-NCAM increase induced by stress cannot be attributed to a secondary effect on neurogenesis.¹⁴¹ Interestingly, the effects of stress on NCAM polysialylation are not restricted to the hippocampus. Chronic stress was also reported to enhance PSA-NCAM expression in the piriform cortex¹⁴⁴ and reduce it in several amygdala nuclei.¹⁴⁵
• Increased L1 mRNA and protein expression in the hippocampus^24,68. Like NCAM, L1 is another cell adhesion molecule of the immunoglobulin superfamily that has been largely implicated in synaptic plasticity and memory formation.⁵⁰ Based on the neuroprotective effects of this molecule, a neuroprotective role has been hypothesized for the stress-induced increases of L1.⁴

Early postnatal stress was also reported to cause a profound reduction of NCAM expression in the hippocampus and cortex when the rats reached adulthood.⁹¹

12.2. AGING

Age-associated cognitive impairment has been described in a variety of species, including rats, macaque monkeys and humans.^172–175 In this second part of the chapter, I will review the main memory alterations that characterize cognitive decline associated with aging in humans and experimental animals (notably rodents). In each case, the neurobiological mechanisms linked to such declines will follow the phenomenological descriptions.

12.3. CONCLUSIONS

Stress is a potent modulator of brain structure, brain function, and cognition. Although not all types of stress are deleterious to memory function, there are many instances in which stress (both acute and chronic) interferes with explicit types of memory, both in humans and animals (Figure 12.7). Stress hormones are also strong modulators of brain development, and excessive stress experienced at certain time windows of vulnerability during life can profoundly affect cognitive function at later stages, with a particular impact on cognitive aging. In fact, exposure to chronic stress seems to recapitulate cognitive deficits observed at aging, as well as accelerating the decline in memory function that characterizes senescence.

FIGURE 12.7

Exposure to stress outside the context of cognitive testing can have impairing effects on memory function. Hippocampus-dependent memory processes such as spatial learning or explicit/declarative types of learning processes are particularly vulnerable (more...)

In addition to a number of neurobiological similarities (including reduced expression of NCAM or altered levels of corticosteroid receptors), both chronic stress and aging have been associated with increased basal levels of glucocorticoid hormones and impaired negative feedback causing delayed high glucocorticoid levels after their activation. In all instances, the deleterious effects of stress and aging seem to particularly impair hippocampus- and prefrontal cortex-dependent memory processes. One of the main challenges of future research will be identifying key factors that determine individual differences in vulnerability to both stress and aging.

REFERENCES

1.

De Kloet ER, et al. Brain corticosteroid receptor balance in health and disease. Endocr. Rev. 1998;19:269. [PubMed: 9626555]

2.

McEwen BS. Stress and hippocampal plasticity. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 1999;22:105. [PubMed: 10202533]

3.

Kim JJ, Diamond DM. The stressed hippocampus, synaptic plasticity and lost memories. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2002;3:453. [PubMed: 12042880]

4.

Sandi C. Stress cognitive impairment and cell adhesion molecules. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2004;5:917. [PubMed: 15550947]

5.

Sandi C. The role and mechanisms of action of glucocorticoid involvement in memory storage. Neural Plast. 1998;6:41. [PMC free article: PMC2565310] [PubMed: 9920681]

6.

De Kloet ER, Oitzl MS, Joëls M. Stress and cognition: are corticosteroids good or bad guys? Trends Neurosci. 1999;22:422. [PubMed: 10481183]

7.

Roozendaal B. Stress and memory: opposing effects of glucocorticoids on memory consolidation and memory retrieval. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 2002;78:578. [PubMed: 12559837]

8.

Steckler T. The neuropsychology of stress. In: Steckler T, Kalin NH, Reul JMHM, editors. Handbook of Stress and the Brain Part 1: The Neurobiology of Stress. Elsevier; Amsterdam: 2005. p. 25.

9.

Mineka S, Hendersen RW. Controllability and predictability in acquired motivation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1985;36:495. [PubMed: 3919637]

10.

Maier SF, Watkins LR. Stressor controllability and learned helplessness: the roles of the dorsal raphe nucleus, serotonin, and corticotropin-releasing factor. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2005;294:829. [PubMed: 15893820]

11.

Maier SF, Watkins LR. Stressor controllability anxiety and serotonin. Cognit. Ther. Res. 1998;22:595.

12.

Herman JP, et al. Central mechanisms of stress integration: hierarchical circuitry controlling hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenocortical responsiveness. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 2003;24:151. [PubMed: 14596810]

13.

Yudt MR, Cidlowski JA. The glucocorticoid receptor: coding a diversity of proteins and responses through a single gene. Mol. Endocrinol. 2002;16:1719. [PubMed: 12145329]

14.

Lupien SJ, McEwen BS. The acute effects of corticosteroids on cognition: integration of animal and human model studies. Brain Res. Rev. 1997;24:1–27. [PubMed: 9233540]

15.

McGaugh JL, Roozendaal B. Role of adrenal stress hormones in forming lasting memories in the brian. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2002;122:205. [PubMed: 12015238]

16.

Cordero MI, Merino JJ, Sandi C. Correlational relationship between shock intensity and corticosterone secretion on the establishment and subsequent expression of contextual fear conditioning. Behav. Neurosci. 1998;112:885. [PubMed: 9733194]

17.

Joëls M, et al. Learning under stress: how does it work? Trends Cogn. Sci. 2006;10:152. [PubMed: 16513410]

18.

Anisman H, Matheson K. Stress, depression, and anhedonia: caveats concerning animal models. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2005;29:525. [PubMed: 15925696]

19.

Amat J, et al. Medial prefrontal cortex determines how stressor controllability affects behvior and dorsal raphe nucleus. Nat. Neurosci. 2005;8:365. [PubMed: 15696163]

20.

Shors TJ. Learning during stressful times. Learn. Mem. 2004;11:137. [PMC free article: PMC3364672] [PubMed: 15054128]

21.

Shors TJ. Stressful experience and learning across the lifespan. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2006;57:55. [PMC free article: PMC3363958] [PubMed: 16318589]

22.

Cordero MI, et al. Prior exposure to a single stress session facilitates subsequent contextual fear conditioning in rats: evidence for a role of corticosterone. Horm. Behav. 2003;444:338. [PubMed: 14613728]

23.

Conrad CD, et al. Repeated restraint stress facilitates fear conditioning independently of causing hippocampal CA3 dendritic atrophy. Behav. Neurosci. 1999;113:902. [PubMed: 10571474]

24.

Sandi C, et al. Effects of chronic stress on contextual fear conditioning and the hippocampal expression of the neural cell adhesion molecule, its polysialylation, and L1. Neuroscience. 2001;102:329. [PubMed: 11166119]

25.

Cordero MI, Kruyt ND, Sandi C. Modulation of contextual fear conditioning by chronic stress in rats is related to individual differences in behavioral reactivity to novelty. Brain Res. 2003;970:242. [PubMed: 12706268]

26.

Warren DA. No spatial learning impairment following exposure to inescapable shock. Psychobiology. 1991;19:127.

27.

Healy DJ, Drugan RC. Escapable stress modulates retention of spatial learning in rats: preliminary evidence for involvement of neurosteroids. Psychobiology. 1996;24:110.

28.

Baker KB, Kim JJ. Effects of stress and hippocampal NMDA receptor antagonism on recognition memory in rats. Learn. Mem. 2002;9:58. [PMC free article: PMC155932] [PubMed: 11992016]

29.

De Quervain DJ, Roozendaal B, McGaugh JL. Stress and glucocorticoids impair retrieval of long-term spatial memory. Nature. 1998;394:787. [PubMed: 9723618]

30.

Diamond DM, et al. Exposing rats to a predator impairs spatial working memory in the radial arm water maze. Hippocampus. 1999;9:542. [PubMed: 10560925]

31.

Celerier A, et al. Contextual and serial discriminations: a new learning paradigm to assess simultaneously the effects of acute stress on retrieval of flexible or stable information in mice. Learn. Mem. 2004;112:196. [PMC free article: PMC379690] [PubMed: 15054135]

32.

De Quervain DJ, et al. Acute cortisone administration impairs retrieval of long-term declarative memory in humans. Nat. Neurosci. 2000;3:313. [PubMed: 10725918]

33.

De Quervain DJ, et al. Glucocorticoid-induced impairment of declarative memory retrieval is associated with reduced blood flow in the medial temporal lobe. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2003;176:1296. [PubMed: 12670318]

34.

Wolf OT, et al. Cortisol differentially affects memory in young and elderly men. Behav. Neurosci. 2001;115:1002. [PubMed: 11584913]

35.

Buss C, et al. Autobiographic memory impairment following acute cortisol administration. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2004;298:1093. [PubMed: 15219661]

36.

Kuhlmann S, Piel M, Wolf OT. Impaired memory retrieval after psychosocial stress in healthy young men. J. Neurosci. 2005;25:2977. [PMC free article: PMC6725125] [PubMed: 15772357]

37.

Eichenbaum H. A cortical–hippocampal system for declarative memory. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2000;11:41. [PubMed: 11252767]

38.

Martin SJ, Grimwood PD, Morris RG. Synaptic plasticity and memory: an evaluation of the hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2000;23:649. [PubMed: 10845078]

39.

Squire LR, Stark CE, Clark RE. The medial temporal lobe. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2004;27:279. [PubMed: 15217334]

40.

Foy MR, et al. Behavioral stress impairs long-term potentiation in rodent hippocampus. Behav. Neural Biol. 1987;48:138. [PubMed: 2820370]

41.

Bennett MC, et al. Serum corticosterone level predicts the magnitude of hippocampal primed burst potentiation and depression in urethane-anesthetized rats. Psychobiology. 1991;19:301.

42.

Diamond DM, et al. Inverted-U relationship between the level of peripheral corticosterone and the magnitude of hippocampal primed burst potentiation. Hippocampus. 1992;4:421. [PubMed: 1308198]

43.

Mesches MH, et al. Exposing rats to a predator blocks primed burst potentiation in the hippocampus in vitro. J. Neurosci. 1999;19:C18. [PMC free article: PMC6783102] [PubMed: 10407060]

44.

Alfarez DN, et al. Corticosterone and stress reduce synaptic potentiation in mouse hippocampal slices with mild stimulation. Neuroscience. 2002;115:1119. [PubMed: 12453484]

45.

Roozendaal B, et al. Glucocorticoid effects on memory retrieval require concurrent noradrenergic activity in the hippocampus and basolateral amygdala. J. Neurosci. 2004;24:8161. [PMC free article: PMC6729799] [PubMed: 15371517]

46.

Murphy BL, et al. Increased dopamine turnover in the prefrontal cortex impairs spatial working memory performance in rats and monkeys. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1996;933:1325. [PMC free article: PMC40079] [PubMed: 8577763]

47.

Arnsten AFT, Goldman-Rakic PS. Noise stress impairs prefrontal cortical cognitive function in monkeys. Arch. Gen. Psychiatr. 1998;55:362. [PubMed: 9554432]

48.

Birnbaum S, et al. A role for norepinephrine in stress-induced cognitive deficits: alpha-1-adrenoceptor mediation in the prefrontal cortex. Biol. Psychiatr. 1999;469:1266. [PubMed: 10560032]

49.

Sandi C, et al. Stress-induced impairment of spatial memory is associated with decreased expression of NCAM in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Biol. Psychiatr. 2005;57:856. [PubMed: 15820706]

50.

Schachner M. Neural recognition molecules and synaptic plasticity. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 1997;9:627. [PubMed: 9330865]

51.

Ronn LC, et al. NCAM-antibodies modulate induction of long-term potentiation in rat hippocampal CA1. Brain Res. 1995;677:145. [PubMed: 7606459]

52.

Kiss JZ, et al. The role of neural cell adhesion molecules in plasticity and repair. Brain Res. Rev. 2001;36:175. [PubMed: 11690614]

53.

Fields RD, Itoh K. Neural cell adhesion molecules in activity-dependent development and synaptic plasticity. Trends Neurosci. 1996;19:473. [PubMed: 8931273]

54.

Kleene R, Schachner M. Glycans and neural cell interactions. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2004;5:195. [PubMed: 14976519]

55.

Doyle E, et al. Intraventricular infusions of anti-neural cell adhesion molecules in a discrete posttraining period impair consolidation of a passive avoidance response in the rat. J. Neurochem. 1992;59:1570. [PubMed: 1402906]

56.

Cambon K, et al. Posttraining administration of a synthetic peptide ligand of the neural cell adhesion molecule, C3d, attenuates long-term expression of contextual fear conditioning. Neuroscience. 2003;122:183. [PubMed: 14596859]

57.

Sandi C, et al. Rapid reversal of stress induced loss of synapses in CA3 of rat hippocampus following water maze training. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2003;17:2447. [PubMed: 12814376]

58.

Venero C, et al. Hippocampal upregulation of NCAM expression and polysialylation plays a key role on spatial memory. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2006;23:1585. [PubMed: 16553622]

59.

McEwen BS. Stress and the aging hippocampus. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 1999;20:49. [PubMed: 9882536]

60.

McEwen BS. Sex stress and the hippocampus: allostasis allostatic load and the aging process. Neurobiol Aging. 2002;23:921. [PubMed: 12392796]

61.

Mazure CM. Does stress cause psychiatric illness? In: Spiegel D, editor. Progress in Psychiatry. American Psychiatric Press; Washington: 1995. p. 270.

62.

Heim C, Nemeroff CB. The impact of early adverse experiences on brain systems involved in the pathophysiology of anxiety and affective disorders. Biol. Psychiatr. 1999;46:1509. [PubMed: 10599479]

63.

Uno H, et al. Hippocampal damage associated with prolonged and fatal stress in primates. J. Neurosci. 1989;9:1705. [PMC free article: PMC6569823] [PubMed: 2723746]

64.

Magariños AM, et al. Chronic psychosocial stress causes apical dendritic atrophy of hippocampal CA3 pyramidal neurons in subordinate tree shrews. J. Neurosci. 1996;16:3534. [PMC free article: PMC6579123] [PubMed: 8627386]

65.

Luine V, et al. Repeated stress causes reversible impairments of spatial memory performance. Brain Res. 1994;639:167. [PubMed: 8180832]

66.

Conrad CD, et al. Chronic stress impairs rat spatial memory on the Y maze, and this effect is blocked by tianeptine pretreatment. Behav. Neurosci. 1996;110:1321. [PubMed: 8986335]

67.

Park CR, Campbell AM, Diamond DM. Chronic psychosocial stress impairs learning, memory and increases sensitivity to yohimbine in adult rats. Biol. Psychiatr. 2001;50:994. [PubMed: 11750896]

68.

Venero C, et al. Chronic stress induces opposite changes in the mRNA expression of the cell adhesion molecules NCAM and L1. Neuroscience. 2002;115:1211. [PubMed: 12453492]

69.

Hellhammer DH, Wade S. Endocrine correlates of stress vulnerability. Psychother. Psychosom. 1993;601:8. [PubMed: 8234641]

70.

Rudolph KD, Hammen C. Age and gender as determinants of stress exposure, generation, and reactions in youngsters: a transactional perspective. Child Dev. 1999;703:660. [PubMed: 10368914]

71.

Grootendorst J, et al. Stress alleviates reduced expression of cell adhesion molecules NCAM, L1, and deficits in learning and corticosterone regulation of apolipoprotein E knockout mice. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2001;14:1505. [PubMed: 11722612]

72.

Troisi A. Gender differences in vulnerability to social stress: a Darwinian perspective. Physiol. Behav. 2001;733:443. [PubMed: 11438373]

73.

Oitzl MS, et al. Maternal deprivation affects behavior from youth to senescence: amplification of individual differences in spatial learning and memory in senescent brown Norway rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2000;12:3771. [PubMed: 11029647]

74.

Piazza PV, et al. Corticosterone levels determine individual vulnerability to amphetamine self-administration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1991;88:2088. [PMC free article: PMC51174] [PubMed: 2006148]

75.

Kabbaj M, et al. Neurobiological correlates of individual differences in novelty-seeking behavior in the rat: differential expression of stress-related molecules. J. Neurosci. 2000;2018:6983. [PMC free article: PMC6772801] [PubMed: 10995843]

76.

Dellu F, et al. Behavioral reactivity to novelty during youth as a predictive factor of stress-induced corticosterone secretion in the elderly: a life-span study in rats. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1996;5:441. [PubMed: 8888367]

77.

Touyarot K, Venero C, Sandi C. Spatial learning impairment induced by chronic stress is related to individual differences in novelty reactivity: search for neurobiological correlates. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2004;29:290. [PubMed: 14604607]

78.

Parker B, et al. The influence of anxiety as a risk to early onset major depression. J. Affect. Disord. 1999;52:11. [PubMed: 10357013]

79.

Gladstone GL, Parker GB. Is behavioral inhibition a risk factor for depression? J. Affect. Disord. 2006. in press. [PubMed: 16808978]

80.

Herrero AI, Sandi C, Venero C. Individual differences in anxiety trait are related to spatial learning abilities and hippocampal expression of mineralocorticoid receptors. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2006. in press. [PubMed: 16580234]

81.

Luine V. Sex differences in chronic stress effects on memory in rats. Stress. 2002;5:205. [PubMed: 12186683]

82.

Bowman RE. Stress-induced changes in spatial memory are sexually differentiated and vary across the lifespan. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2005;178:526. [PubMed: 16011489]

83.

Bowman RE, Beck KD, Luine VN. Chronic stress effects on memory: sex differences in performance and monoaminergic activity. Horm. Behav. 2003;43:48. [PubMed: 12614634]

84.

Bodnoff SR, et al. Enduring effects of chronic corticosterone treatment on spatial learning, synaptic plasticity, and hippocampal neuropathology in young and mid-aged rats. J. Neurosci. 1995;15:61. [PMC free article: PMC6578287] [PubMed: 7823152]

85.

Levy A, et al. Aging, stress, and cognitive function. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1994;717:79. [PubMed: 8030854]

86.

Sandi C, Touyarot K. Mid-life stress and cognitive deficits during early aging in rats: Individual differences and hippocampal correlates. Neurobiol. Aging. 2006;27:128. [PubMed: 16298248]

87.

Meaney MJ, et al. Effect of neonatal handling on age-related impairments associated with the hippocampus. Science. 1988;239:766. [PubMed: 3340858]

88.

Sanchez MM, Ladd CO, Plotsky PM. Early adverse experience as a developmental risk factor for later psychopathology: evidence from rodent and primate models. Dev. Psychopathol. 2001;133:419. [PubMed: 11523842]

89.

Avishai-Eliner S, et al. Stressed-out or in utero? Trends Neurosci. 2002;25:518. [PMC free article: PMC2930786] [PubMed: 12220880]

90.

Huot RL, et al. Neonatal maternal separation reduces hippocampal mossy fiber density in adult Long Evans rats. Brain Res. 2002;52:9501. [PubMed: 12231228]

91.

Koo JW, et al. The postnatal environment can counteract prenatal effects on cognitive ability, cell proliferation, and synaptic protein expression. FASEB J. 2003;17:1556. [PubMed: 12824278]

92.

Brunson KL, et al. Mechanisms of late-onset cognitive decline after early-life stress. J. Neurosci. 2005;25:9328. [PMC free article: PMC3100717] [PubMed: 16221841]

93.

Avishai-Eliner S, et al. Altered regulation of gene and protein expression of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis components in an immature rat model of chronic stress. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2001;139:799. [PMC free article: PMC3100736] [PubMed: 11578530]

94.

Khalilov I, Holmes GL, Ben-Ari Y. In vitro formation of a secondary epileptogenic mirror focus by interhippocampal propagation of seizures. Nat. Neurosci. 2003;610:1079. [PubMed: 14502289]

95.

Kesner RP, Hopkins RO. Mnemonic functions of the hippocampus: a comparison between animals and humans. Biol. Psychol. 2006;73:3. [PubMed: 16473455]

96.

Kim JJ, Song EY, Kosten TA. Stress effects in the hippocampus: synaptic plasticity and memory. Stress. 2006;9:1. [PubMed: 16753928]

97.

Bremner JD. Does stress damage the brain? Biol. Psychiatr. 1999;45:797. [PubMed: 10202566]

98.

Sheline YI. 3D MRI studies of neuroanatomic changes in unipolar major depression: the role of stress and medical comorbidity. Biol. Psychiatr. 2000;48:791. [PubMed: 11063975]

99.

Kitayama N, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging MRI measurement of hippocampal volume in post-traumatic stress disorder: a meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 2005;88:79. [PubMed: 16033700]

100.

Watanabe Y, et al. Phenytoin prevents stress- and corticosterone-induced atrophy of CA3 pyramidal neurons. Hippocampus. 1992;2:431. [PubMed: 1308199]

101.

Magariños AM, McEwen BS. Stress-induced atrophy of apical dendrites of hippocampal CA3c neurons: involvement of glucocorticoid secretion and excitatory amino acid receptors. Neuroscience. 1995;69:89. [PubMed: 8637636]

102.

Magariños AM, Verdugo-Garcia JM, McEwen BS. Chronic restraint stress alters synaptic terminal structure in hippocampus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA. 1997;94:14002. [PMC free article: PMC28422] [PubMed: 9391142]

103.

Sousa N, et al. Reorganization of the morphology of hippocampal neurites and synapses after stress-induced damage correlates with behavioral improvement. Neuroscience. 2000;97:253. [PubMed: 10799757]

104.

Stewart. M.G. et al. Stress suppresses and learning induces ultrastructural plasticity in CA3 of rat hippocampus: a three-dimensional ultrastructural study of thorny excrescences and their post-synaptic densities. Neuroscience. 2005;131:43. [PubMed: 15680690]

105.

Donohue HS, et al. Volume measurements show that synaptic density is unchanged in CA1 rat hippocampus after chronic restraint stress but postsynaptic density size increases. Neuroscience. 2006;140:597. [PubMed: 16600515]

106.

Gould E, Tanapat P. Stress and hippocampal neurogenesis. Biol. Psychiatr. 1999;46:1472. [PubMed: 10599477]

107.

Sapolsky RM. The possibility of neurotoxicity in the hippocampus in major depression: a primer on neuron death. Biol. Psychiatr. 2000;48:755. [PubMed: 11063972]

108.

Bush G, et al. The counting Stroop: an interference task specialized for functional neuroimaging validation study with functional MRI. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1998;6:270. [PMC free article: PMC6873370] [PubMed: 9704265]

109.

MacDonald AW, et al. Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. Science. 2000;288:1835. [PubMed: 10846167]

110.

Kerns JG, et al. Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science. 2004;303:1023. [PubMed: 14963333]

111.

Ahima RS, Harlan RE. Differential corticosteroid regulation of type II glucocorticoid receptor-like immunoreactivity in the rat central nervous system: topography and implications. Endocrinology. 1991;129:226. [PubMed: 2055185]

112.

Sanchez MM, et al. Distribution of corticosteroid receptors in the rhesus brain: relative absence of glucocorticoid receptors in the hippocampal formation. J. Neurosci. 2000;20:4657. [PMC free article: PMC6772467] [PubMed: 10844035]

113.

Diorio D, Viau V, Meaney MJ. The role of the medial prefrontal cortex cingulate gyrus in the regulation of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal responses to stress. J. Neurosci. 1993;13:3839. [PMC free article: PMC6576467] [PubMed: 8396170]

114.

Drevets WC, et al. Subgenual prefrontal cortex abnormalities in mood disorders. Nature. 1997;386:824. [PubMed: 9126739]

115.

Rauch SL, et al. Selectively reduced regional cortical volumes in post-traumatic stress disorder. Neuroreport. 2003;14:913. [PubMed: 12802174]

116.

Cook SC, Wellman CL. Chronic stress alters dendritic morphology in rat medial prefrontal cortex. J. Neurobiol. 2004;60:236. [PubMed: 15266654]

117.

Radley JJ, et al. Chronic behavioral stress induces apical dendritic reorganization in pyramidal neurons of the medial prefrontal cortex. Neuroscience. 2004;1251:1. [PubMed: 15051139]

118.

Radley JJ, et al. Repeated stress induces dendritic spine loss in the rat medial prefrontal cortex. Cereb. Cortex. 2006;16:313. [PubMed: 15901656]

119.

Cerqueira JJ, et al. Morphological correlates of corticosteroid-induced changes in prefrontal cortex-dependent behaviors. J. Neurosci. 2005;25:7792. [PMC free article: PMC6725252] [PubMed: 16120780]

120.

Wellman CL. Dendritic reorganization in pyramidal neurons in medial prefrontal cortex after chronic corticosterone administration. J. Neurobiol. 2001;49:245. [PubMed: 11745662]

121.

Phelps E.A. and LeDoux J.E. Contributions of the amygdala to emotion processing: from animal models to human behavior. Neuron. 2005;48:175. [PubMed: 16242399]

122.

Vyas A, et al. Chronic stress induces contrasting patterns of dendritic remodeling in hippocampal and amygdaloid neurons. J. Neurosci. 2002;22:6810. [PMC free article: PMC6758130] [PubMed: 12151561]

123.

Mitra R, et al. Stress duration modulates the spatiotemporal patterns of spine formation in the basolateral amygdala. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2005;102:9371. [PMC free article: PMC1166638] [PubMed: 15967994]

124.

Alfarez DN, Joëls M, Krugers HJ. Chronic unpredictable stress impairs long-term potentiation in rat hippocampal CA1 area and dentate gyrus in vitro. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2003;17:1928. [PubMed: 12752792]

125.

Gerges NZ, et al. Reduced basal CaMKII levels in hippocampal CA1 region: possible cause of stress-induced impairment of LTP in chronically stressed rats. Hippocampus. 2004;14:402. [PubMed: 15132438]

126.

Pavlides C, Nivon LG, McEwen BS. Effects of chronic stress on hippocampal long-term potentiation. Hippocampus. 2002;12:245. [PubMed: 12000121]

127.

Pavlides C, Watanabe Y, McEwen BS. Effects of glucocorticoids on hippocampal long-term potentiation. Hippocampus. 1993;3:183. [PubMed: 8353605]

128.

Maroun M, Richter-Levin G. Exposure to acute stress blocks the induction of long-term potentiation of the amygdala-prefrontal cortex pathway in vivo. J. Neurosci. 2003;11:4406. [PMC free article: PMC6740777] [PubMed: 12805280]

129.

Molteni R, et al. Modulation of fibroblast growth factor-2 by stress and corticosteroids: from developmental events to adult brain plasticity. Brain Res. Rev. 2001;37:249. [PubMed: 11744090]

130.

Lowy MT, Gault L, Yamamoto BK. Adrenalectomy attenuates stress-induced elevations in extracellular glutamate concentrations in the hippocampus. J. Neurochem. 1993;61:1957. [PubMed: 7901339]

131.

Moghaddam B, et al. Glucocorticoids mediate the stress-induced extracellular accumulation of glutamate. Brain Res. 1994;655:251. [PubMed: 7812782]

132.

Venero C, Borrell J. Rapid glucocorticoid effects on excitatory amino acid levels in the hippocampus: a microdialysis study in freely moving rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 1999;11:2465. [PubMed: 10383636]

133.

Krugers HJ, et al. A single social stress-experience alters glutamate receptor-binding in rat hippocampal CA3 area. Neurosci. Lett. 1993;154:73. [PubMed: 8103203]

134.

Bartanusz V, et al. Stress-induced changes in messenger RNA levels of N-methyl-D-aspartate and AMPA receptor subunits in selected regions of the rat hippocampus and hypothalamus. Neuroscience. 1995;66:247. [PubMed: 7477869]

135.

Weiland NG, Orchinik M, Tanapat P. Chronic corticosterone treatment induces parallel changes in N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor subunit messenger RNA levels and antagonist binding sites in the hippocampus. Neuroscience. 1997;78:653. [PubMed: 9153648]

136.

Kole MH, Swan L, Fuchs E. The antidepressant tianeptine persistently modulates glutamate receptor currents of the hippocampal CA3 commissural associational synapse in chronically stressed rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2002;16:807. [PubMed: 12372016]

137.

Schaaf MJM, et al. Corticosterone regulates expression of BDNF and trkB but not NT-3 and trkC mRNA in the rat hippocampus. J. Neurosci. Res. 1997;48:334. [PubMed: 9169859]

138.

Trentani A, et al. Selective chronic stress-induced in vivo ERK1/2 hyperphosphorylation in medial prefrontocortical dendrites: implications for stress-related cortical pathology? Eur. J. Neurosci. 2002;15:1681. [PubMed: 12059976]

139.

Meller E, et al. Region-specific effects of acute and repeated restraint stress on the phosphorylation of mitogen-activated protein kinases. Brain Res. 2003;979:57. [PubMed: 12850571]

140.

Kuipers SD, et al. Molecular correlates of impaired prefrontal plasticity in response to chronic stress. J. Neurochem. 2003;85:1312. [PubMed: 12753089]

141.

Touyarot K, Sandi C. Chronic restraint stress induces an isoform-specific regulation on the neural cell adhesion molecule in the hippocampus. Neural Plast. 2002;9:147. [PMC free article: PMC2565403] [PubMed: 12757368]

142.

Pham K, et al. Repeated restraint stress suppresses neurogenesis and induces biphasic PSA-NCAM expression in the adult rat dentate gyrus. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2003;17:879. [PubMed: 12603278]

143.

Seki T, Arai Y. Highly polysialylated neural cell adhesion molecule NCAM-H is expressed by newly generated granule cells in the gyrus dentatus of the adult rat. J. Neurosci. 1992;13:2351. [PMC free article: PMC6576495] [PubMed: 7684771]

144.

Nacher J, et al. Chronic restraint stress and chronic corticosterone treatment modulate differentially the expression of molecules related to structural plasticity in the adult rat piriform cortex. Neuroscience. 2004;126:503. [PubMed: 15207367]

145.

Cordero MI, et al. Chronic restraint stress down-regulates amygdaloid expression of PSA-NCAM. Neuroscience. 2005;133:903. [PubMed: 15927407]

146.

Christensen H. What cognitive changes can be expected with normal aging? Austrzal. N. Z. J. Psychiatr. 2001;35:768. [PubMed: 11990887]

147.

Rabbit P, et al. Identifying and separating the effects of practice and of cognitive ageing during a large longitudinal study of elderly community residents. Neuropsychologia. 2001;39:532. [PubMed: 11254936]

148.

Nyberg L, Persson J, Nilsson LG. Individual differences in memory enhancement by encoding enactment: relationships to adult age and biological factors. Neurosci. Behav. Rev. 2002;26:835. [PubMed: 12470695]

149.

Singer T, Lindenberger U, Baltes PB. Plasticity of memory for new learning in very old age: a story of major loss? Psychol Aging. 2003;18:306. [PubMed: 12825778]

150.

Rowe WB, et al. Reactivity to novelty in cognitively impaired and cognitively unimpaired aged rats and young rats. Neuroscience. 1998;83:669. [PubMed: 9483551]

151.

Bach ME, et al. Age-related defects in spatial memory are correlated with defects in the late phase of hippocampal long-term potentiation in vitro and are attenuated by drugs that enhance the cAMP signaling pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1999;96:5280. [PMC free article: PMC21855] [PubMed: 10220457]

152.

Schulz D, et al. Water maze performance, exploratory activity, inhibitory avoidance and hippocampal plasticity in aged superior and inferior learners. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2002;16:2175. [PubMed: 12473085]

153.

Landfield PW, Waymire JC, Lynch G. Hippocampal aging and adrenocorticoids: quantitative correlations. Science. 1978;202:1098. [PubMed: 715460]

154.

Porter NM, Landfield PW. Stress hormones and brain aging: adding injury to insult? Nat Neurosci. 1998;1:3. [PubMed: 10195096]

155.

Singer BH, Ryff CDE. New Horizons in Health: An Integrative Approach. National Research Council, National Academy Press; Washington: 2001. [PubMed: 20669490]

156.

Hibberd C, Yau JL, Seckl JR. Glucocorticoids and the ageing hippocampus. J. Anat. 2000;197:553. [PMC free article: PMC1468170] [PubMed: 11197528]

157.

Issa AM, et al. Hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal activity in aged, cognitively impaired and cognitively unimpaired rats. J. Neurosci. 1990;10:3247. [PMC free article: PMC6570181] [PubMed: 2170594]

158.

Landfield PW, Baskin RK, Pitler TA. Brain aging correlates: retardation by hormonal–pharmacological treatments. Science. 1981;214:581. [PubMed: 6270791]

159.

Lupien SJ, et al. Cortisol levels during human aging predict hippocampal atrophy and memory deficits. Nat Neurosci. 1998;1:69. [PubMed: 10195112]

160.

Van Cauter E, Leproult R, Kupfer DJ. Effects of gender and age on the levels and circadian rhythmicity of plasma cortisol. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 1996;81:2468. [PubMed: 8675562]

161.

Wilkinson CW, Peskind ER, Raskind MA. Decreased hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis sensitivity to cortisol feedback inhibition in human aging. Neuroendocrinology. 1997;65:79. [PubMed: 9032777]

162.

Wolf OT, et al. Basal hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenal axis activity and corticotropin feedback in young and older men: relationship to magnetic resonance imaging derived hippocampus and cingulate gyrus volumes. Neuroendocrinology. 2002;75:241. [PubMed: 11979054]

163.

Yau JL, et al. Glucocorticoids, hippocampal corticosteroid receptor gene expression and antidepressant treatment: relationship with spatial learning in young and aged rats. Neuroscience. 1995;66:571. [PubMed: 7644021]

164.

Bizon JL, et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function and corticosterone receptor expression in behaviourally characterized young and aged Long-Evans rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2001;14:1739. [PubMed: 11860468]

165.

Nichols NR, Zieba M, Bye N. Do glucocorticoids contribute to brain aging? Brain Res. Rev. 2001;37:273. [PubMed: 11744092]

166.

Lorens S, et al. Neurochemical, endocrine and immunological responses to stress in young and old Fischer 344 male tasks. Neurobiol. Aging. 1990;11:139. [PubMed: 2348902]

167.

Peiffer A, Barden N, Meaney MJ. Age-related changes in glucocorticoid receptor binding and mRNA levels in the rat brain and pituitary. Neurobiol Aging. 1991;12:475. [PubMed: 1770983]

168.

Van Eekelen J, et al. The effect of aging on stress responsiveness and central corticosteroid receptors in the brown Norway rat. Neurobiol. Aging. 1991;13:159. [PubMed: 1311803]

169.

Hassan AH, et al. Plasticity of hippocampal corticosteroid receptors during aging in the rat. FASEB J. 1999;13:115. [PubMed: 9872936]

170.

Meijer OC, et al. Correlations between hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis parameters depend on age and learning capacity. Endocrinology. 2005;146:1372. [PubMed: 15564338]

171.

Wolf OT, et al. Subjective memory complaints in aging are associated with elevated cortisol levels. Neurobiol. Aging. 2005;26:1357. [PubMed: 16243606]

172.

Peters A, et al. Neurobiological bases of age-related cognitive decline in the rhesus monkey. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 1996;55:861. [PubMed: 8759775]

173.

Buckner RL. Memory and executive function in aging and AD: Multiple factors that cause decline and reserve factors that compensate. Neuron. 2004;44:195. [PubMed: 15450170]

174.

Hedden T, Gabrieli JDE. Insights into the aging mind: a view from cognitive neuroscience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2004;5:87. [PubMed: 14735112]

175.

Discoll I, Sutherland RJ. The aging hippocampus: navigating between rat and human experiments. Rev. Neurosci. 2005;16:87. [PubMed: 15957576]

176.

Weber R, Brown L, Weldon J. Cognitive maps of environmental knowledge and preference in nursing home patients. Exp. Aging Res. 1978;4:157. [PubMed: 679967]

177.

Kirasic KC, Allen GL, Haggerty D. Age-related differences in adults’ macrospatial cognitive processes. Exp. Aging Res. 1992;18:33. [PubMed: 1446693]

178.

Lipman PD, Caplan LJ. Adult age differences in memory for routes: effects of instruction and spatial diagram. Psychol. Aging. 1992;7:435. [PubMed: 1388865]

179.

Moffat SD, Zonderman AB, Resnick SM. Age differences in spatial memory in a virtual environment navigation task. Neurobiol Aging. 2001;22:787. [PubMed: 11705638]

180.

Fleischman DA, et al. Repetition priming and recognition memory in younger and older persons: temporal stability and performance. Neuropsychology. 2005;19:750. [PubMed: 16351350]

181.

Lupien SJ, Wan N. Successful ageing: from cell to self. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2004;1449:1413. [PMC free article: PMC1693425] [PubMed: 15347532]

182.

Dermaut B, et al. Tau is central in the genetic Alzheimer–frontotemporal dementia spectrum. Trends Genet. 2005;2112:664. [PubMed: 16221505]

183.

Hof PR, Morrison JH. The aging brain: morphomolecular senescence of cortical circuits. Trends Neurosci. 2004;27:607. [PubMed: 15374672]

184.

Cabeza R. Hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults: the HAROLD model. Psychol Aging. 2002;171:85. [PubMed: 11931290]

185.

Ingram DK. Brain-behavior linkages in aged rodent models: strategies for examining individual differences. Neurobiol Aging. 1996;17:497. [PubMed: 8725916]

186.

Van der Staay FJ. Assessment of age-associated cognitive deficits in rats: a tricky business. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2002;267:753. [PubMed: 12470686]

187.

Van der Staay FJ, Blokland A. Behavioral differences between outbred Wistar, inbred Fischer 344, brown Norway, and hybrid Fischer 344, brown Norway rats. Physiol. Behav. 1996;60:97. [PubMed: 8804648]

188.

Spencer RL, O’Steen WK, McEwen BS. Water maze performance of aged Sprague-Dawley rats in relation to retinal morphologic measures. Behav. Brain Res. 1995;68:139. [PubMed: 7654300]

189.

Gallagher M, Rapp PR. The use of animal models to study the effects of aging on cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1997;48:339. [PubMed: 9046563]

190.

Winocur G. Conditional learning in aged rats: evidence of hippocampal and pre-frontal cortex impairment. Neurobiol Aging. 1991;13:131. [PubMed: 1542374]

191.

Zyzak DR, et al. Cognitive decline associated with normal aging in rats: a neuropsychological approach. Learn. Mem. 1995;2:1. [PubMed: 10467562]

192.

Barense MD, Fox MT, Baxter MG. Aged rats are impaired on an attentional set-shifting task sensitive to medial frontal cortex damage in young rats. Learn. Mem. 2002;9:181. [PMC free article: PMC182583] [PubMed: 12177232]

193.

Schoenbaum G, et al. Encoding changes in orbitofrontal cortex in reversal-impaired aged rats. J. Neurophysiol. 2006;95:1509. [PMC free article: PMC2430623] [PubMed: 16338994]

194.

Barnes CA. Aging and the physiology of spatial memory. Neurobiol Aging. 1988;9:563. [PubMed: 3062467]

195.

Gallagher M, Pelleymounter MA. Spatial learning deficits in old rats: a model for memory decline in the aged. Neurobiol Aging. 1988;9:363. [PubMed: 3062465]

196.

Rosenzweig ES, Barnes CA. Impact of aging on hippocampal function: plasticity, network dynamics, and cognition. Prog. Neurobiol. 2003;69:143. [PubMed: 12758108]

197.

Barnes CA, Nadel L, Honig WK. Spatial memory deficit in senescent rats. Can. J. Psychol. 1980;34:29. [PubMed: 7388694]

198.

Caprioli A, et al. Spatial learning and memory in the radial maze: a longitudinal study in rats from 4 to 25 months of age. Neurobiol. Aging. 1991;12:605. [PubMed: 1770992]

199.

Mizumori SJY, Lavoie AM, Kalyani A. Redistribution of spatial representation in the hippocampus of aged rats performing a spatial memory task. Behav. Neurosci. 1996;110:1006. [PubMed: 8919003]

200.

Barnes CA, et al. Behavioral and neurophysiological examples of functional sparing in senescent rat. Can. J. Psychol. 1987;41:131. [PubMed: 3502892]

201.

Barnes CA. Memory deficits associated with senescence: a neurophysiological and behavioral study in the rat. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 1979;93:74. [PubMed: 221551]

202.

Gage FH, Dunnett SB, Björklund A. Age-related impairments in spatial memory are independent of those in sensorimotor skills. Neurobiol. Aging. 1989;10:347. [PubMed: 2682316]

203.

Rapp PR, Rosenberg RA, Gallagher M. An evaluation of spatial information processing in aged rats. Behav. Neurosci. 1987;101:3. [PubMed: 3828055]

204.

Aitken DH, Meaney MJ. Temporally graded, age-related impairments in spatial memory in the rat. Neurobiol. Aging. 1989;10:273. [PubMed: 2747831]

205.

Yau JL, Morris RG, Seckl JR. Hippocampal corticosteroid receptor mRNA expression and spatial learning in the aged Wistar rat. Brain Res. 1994;657:59. [PubMed: 7820644]

206.

Rosenzweig ES, et al. Role of temporal summation in age-related LTP-induction deficits. Hippocampus. 1997;7:549. [PubMed: 9347351]

207.

Gallagher M, Nicolle MM. Animal models of normal aging: relationship between cognitive decline and markers in hippocampal circuitry. Behav. Brain Res. 1993;57:155. [PubMed: 7906946]

208.

Nicholson DA, et al. Reduction in size of perforated postsynaptic densities in hippocampal axospinous synapses and age-related spatial learning impairments. J. Neurosci. 2004;2435:7648. [PMC free article: PMC6729620] [PubMed: 15342731]

209.

Topic B, et al. Aged and adult rats compared in acquisition and extinction of escape from the water maze: focus on individual differences. Behav. Neurosci. 2005;119:127. [PubMed: 15727519]

210.

Markowska AL, et al. Individual differences in aging: behavioral and neurobiological correlates. Neurobiol. Aging. 1989;10:31. [PubMed: 2569170]

211.

Rapp PR, Amaral DG. Individual differences in the cognitive and neurobiological consequences of normal aging. Trends Neurosci. 1992;15:340. [PubMed: 1382333]

212.

Drapeau E, et al. Spatial memory performances of aged rats in the water maze predict levels of hippocampal neurogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2003;100:14385. [PMC free article: PMC283601] [PubMed: 14614143]

213.

Gage FH, Kelly PA, Björklund A. Regional changes in brain glucose metabolism reflect cognitive impairments in aged rats. J. Neurosci. 1984;4:2856. [PMC free article: PMC6564735] [PubMed: 6502208]

214.

Coleman PD, Flood DG. Neuron numbers and dendritic extent in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol. Aging. 1987;8:521. [PubMed: 3323927]

215.

Rapp PR, Gallagher M. Preserved neuron number in the hippocampus of aged rats with spatial learning deficits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1996;93:9926. [PMC free article: PMC38531] [PubMed: 8790433]

216.

Anderson B, Rutledge V. Age and hemisphere effects on dendritic structure. Brain. 1996;119:1983. [PubMed: 9010002]

217.

Jacobs B, Driscoll L, Schall M. Life-span dendritic and spine changes in areas 10 and 18 of human cortex: a quantitative Golgi study. J. Comp. Neurol. 1997;386:661. [PubMed: 9378859]

218.

Duan H, et al. Age-related dendritic and spine changes in corticocortically projecting neurons in macaque monkeys. Cereb. Cortex. 2003;139:950. [PubMed: 12902394]

219.

Hof PR, et al. Age-related changes in GluR2 and NMDAR1 glutamate receptor subunit protein immunoreactivity in corticocortically projecting neurons in macaque and patas monkeys. Brain Res. 2002;928:175. [PubMed: 11844485]

220.

Bai L, et al. Changes in the expression of the NR2B subunit during aging in macaque monkeys. Neurobiol. Aging. 2004;25:201. [PubMed: 14749138]

221.

Peters A. The effects of normal aging on myelin and nerve fibers: a review. J. Neurocytol. 2002;31:581. [PubMed: 14501200]

222.

Geinisman Y, et al. Age-related loss of axospinous synapses formed by two afferent systems in the rat dentate gyrus as revealed by the unbiased stereological dissector technique. Hippocampus. 1992;2:437. [PubMed: 1308200]

223.

Arnsten AFT. Age-related cognitive deficits and neurotransmitters — the role of catecholamine mechanisms in prefrontal cortical cognitive decline. In: Peters A, Morrison JH, editors. Cerebral Cortex: Neurodegenerative and Age-Related Changes in Structure and Function of Cerebral Cortex. Vol. 14. Elsevier; New York: 1999. p. 89.

224.

Lee H-K, et al. NMDA receptor-independent long-term depression correlates with successful aging in rats. Nat. Neurosci. 2005;8:1657. [PubMed: 16286930]

224a.

Ramos BP, et al. Dysregulation of protein kinase A signaling in the aged prefrontal cortex: new strategy for treating age-related cognitive decline. Neuron. 2003;40:835. [PubMed: 14622586]

225.

Rosenzweig ES, et al. Hippocampal map realignment and spatial learning. Nat. Neurosci. 2003;6:611. [PubMed: 12717437]

226.

O’Keefe J. A review of the hippocampal place cells. Prog. Neurobiol. 1979;13:419. [PubMed: 396576]

227.

Gothard KM, Skaggs WE, McNaughton BL. Dynamics of mismatch correction in the hippocampal ensemble code for space: interaction between path integration and environmental cues. J. Neurosci. 1996;16:8027. [PMC free article: PMC6579211] [PubMed: 8987829]

228.

O’Keefe J, Nadel L. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map. Oxford University Press; New York: 1978.