Research Area: Neurobiology

Neuroscientists identify a circuit that helps the brain record memories of new locations.

Anne Trafton | MIT News Office

December 25, 2017

When you enter a room, your brain is bombarded with sensory information. If the room is a place you know well, most of this information is already stored in long-term memory. However, if the room is unfamiliar to you, your brain creates a new memory of it almost immediately.

MIT neuroscientists have now discovered how this occurs. A small region of the brainstem, known as the locus coeruleus, is activated in response to novel sensory stimuli, and this activity triggers the release of a flood of dopamine into a certain region of the hippocampus to store a memory of the new location.

“We have the remarkable ability to memorize some specific features of an experience in an entirely new environment, and such ability is crucial for our adaptation to the constantly changing world,” says Susumu Tonegawa, the Picower Professor of Biology and Neuroscience and director of the RIKEN-MIT Center for Neural Circuit Genetics at the Picower Institute for Learning and Memory.

“This study opens an exciting avenue of research into the circuit mechanism by which behaviorally relevant stimuli are specifically encoded into long-term memory, ensuring that important stimuli are stored preferentially over incidental ones,” adds Tonegawa, the senior author of the study.

Akiko Wagatsuma, a former MIT research scientist, is the lead author of the study, which appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of Dec. 25.

New places

In a study published about 15 years ago, Tonegawa’s lab found that a part of the hippocampus called the CA3 is responsible for forming memories of novel environments. They hypothesized that the CA3 receives a signal from another part of the brain when a novel place is encountered, stimulating memory formation.

They believed this signal to be carried by chemicals known as neuromodulators, which influence neuronal activity. The CA3 receives neuromodulators from both the locus coeruleus (LC) and a region called the ventral tegmental area (VTA), which is a key part of the brain’s reward circuitry. The researchers decided to focus on the LC because it has been shown to project to the CA3 extensively and to respond to novelty, among many other functions.

The LC responds to an array of sensory input, including visual information as well as sound and odor, then sends information on to other brain areas, including the CA3. To uncover the role of LC-CA3 communication, the researchers genetically engineered mice so that they could block the neuronal activity between those regions by shining light on neurons that form the connection.

To test the mice’s ability to form new memories, the researchers placed the mice in a large open space that they had never seen before. The next day, they placed them in the same space again. Mice whose LC-CA3 connections were not disrupted spent much less time exploring the space on the second day, because the environment was already familiar to them. However, when the researchers interfered with the LC-CA3 connection during the first exposure to the space, the mice explored the area on the second day just as much as they had on the first. This suggests that they were unable to form a memory of the new environment.

The LC appears to exert this effect by releasing the neuromodulator dopamine into the CA3 region, which was surprising because the LC is known to be a major source of norepinephrine to the hippocampus. The researchers believe that this influx of dopamine helps to boost CA3’s ability to strengthen synapses and form a memory of the new location.

They found that this mechanism was not required for other types of memory, such as memories of fearful events, but appears to be specific to memory of new environments. The connections between the LC and CA3 are necessary for long-term spatial memories to form in CA3.

“The selectivity of successful memory formation has long been a puzzle,” says Richard Morris, a professor of neuroscience at the University of Edinburgh, who was not involved in the research. “This study goes a long way toward identifying the brain mechanisms of this process. Activity in the pathway between the locus coeruleus and CA3 occurs most strongly during novelty, and it seems that activity fixes the representations of everyday experience, helping to register and retain what’s been happening and where we’ve been.”

Choosing to remember

This mechanism likely evolved as a way to help animals survive, allowing them to remember new environments without wasting brainpower on recording places that are already familiar, the researchers say.

“When we are exposed to sensory information, we unconsciously choose what to memorize. For an animal’s survival, certain things are necessary to be remembered, and other things, familiar things, probably can be forgotten,” Wagatsuma says.

Still unknown is how the LC recognizes that an environment is new. The researchers hypothesize that some part of the brain is able to compare new environments with stored memories or with expectations of the environment, but more studies are needed to explore how this might happen.

“That’s the next big question,” Tonegawa says. “Hopefully new technology will help to resolve that.”

The research was funded by the RIKEN Brain Science Institute, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the JPB Foundation.

Existence of “silent engrams” suggests that existing models of memory formation should be revised.

Anne Trafton | MIT News Office

October 23, 2017

Learning and memory are generally thought to be composed of three major steps: encoding events into the brain network, storing the encoded information, and later retrieving it for recall.

Two years ago, MIT neuroscientists discovered that under certain types of retrograde amnesia, memories of a particular event could be stored in the brain even though they could not be retrieved through natural recall cues. This phenomenon suggests that existing models of memory formation need to be revised, as the researchers propose in a new paper in which they further detail how these “silent engrams” are formed and re-activated.

The researchers believe their findings offer evidence that memory storage does not rely on the strengthening of connections, or “synapses,” between memory cells, as has long been thought. Instead, a pattern of connections that form between these cells during the first few minutes after an event occurs are sufficient to store a memory.

“One of our main conclusions in this study is that a specific memory is stored in a specific pattern of connectivity between engram cell ensembles that lie along an anatomical pathway. This conclusion is provocative because the dogma has been that a memory is instead stored by synaptic strength,” says Susumu Tonegawa, the Picower Professor of Biology and Neuroscience, the director of the RIKEN-MIT Center for Neural Circuit Genetics at the Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, and the study’s senior author.

The researchers also showed that even though memories held by silent engrams cannot be naturally recalled, the memories persist for at least a week and can be “awakened” days later by treating cells with a protein that stimulates synapse formation.

Dheeraj Roy, a recent MIT PhD recipient, is the lead author of the paper, which appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of Oct. 23. Other authors are MIT postdoc Shruti Muralidhar and technical associate Lillian Smith.

Silent memories

Neuroscientists have long believed that memories of events are stored when synaptic connections, which allow neurons to communicate with each other, are strengthened. Previous studies have found that if synthesis of certain cellular proteins is blocked in mice immediately after an event occurs, the mice will have no long-term memory of the event.

However, in a 2015 paper, Tonegawa and his colleagues showed for the first time that memories could be stored even when synthesis of the cellular proteins is blocked. They found that while the mice could not recall those memories in response to natural cues, such as being placed in the cage where a fearful event took place, the memories were still there and could be artificially retrieved using a technique known as optogenetics.

The researchers have dubbed these memory cells “silent engrams,” and they have since found that these engrams can also be formed in other situations. In a study of mice with symptoms that mimic early Alzheimer’s disease, the researchers found that while the mice had trouble recalling memories, those memories still existed and could be optogenetically retrieved.

In a more recent study of a process called systems consolidation of memory, the researchers found engrams in the hippocampus and the prefrontal cortex that encoded the same memory. However, the prefrontal cortex engrams were silent for about two weeks after the memory was initially encoded, while the hippocampal engrams were active right away. Over time, the memory in the prefrontal cortex became active, while the hippocampal engram slowly became silent.

In their new PNAS study, the researchers investigated further how these silent engrams are formed, how long they last, and how they can be re-activated.

Similar to their original 2015 study, they trained mice to fear being placed in a certain cage, by delivering a mild foot shock. After this training, the mice freeze when placed back in that cage. As the mice were trained, their memory cells were labeled with a light-sensitive protein that allows the cells to be re-activated with light. The researchers also inhibited the synthesis of cellular proteins immediately after the training occurred.

They found that after the training, the mice did not react when placed back in the cage where the training took place. However, the mice did freeze when the memory cells were activated with laser light while the animals were in a cage that should not have had any fearful associations. These silent memories could be activated by laser light for up to eight days after the original training.

Making connections

The findings offer support for Tonegawa’s new hypothesis that the strengthening of synaptic connections, while necessary for a memory to be initially encoded, is not necessary for its subsequent long-term storage. Instead, he proposes that memories are stored in the specific pattern of connections formed between engram cell ensembles. These connections, which form very rapidly during encoding, are distinct from the synaptic strengthening that occurs later (within a few hours of the event) with the help of protein synthesis.

“What we are saying is that even without new cellular protein synthesis, once a new connection is made, or a pre-existing connection is strengthened during encoding, that new pattern of connections is maintained,” Tonegawa says. “Even if you cannot induce natural memory recall, the memory information is still there.”

This raised a question about the purpose of the post-encoding protein synthesis. Considering that silent engrams are not retrieved by natural cues, the researchers believe the primary purpose of the protein synthesis is to enable natural recall cues to do their job efficiently.

The researchers also tried to reactivate the silent engrams by treating the mice with a protein called PAK1, which promotes the formation of synapses. They found that this treatment, given two days after the original event took place, was enough to grow new synapses between engram cells. A few days after the treatment, mice whose ability to recall the memory had been blocked initially would freeze after being placed in the cage where the training took place. Furthermore, their reaction was just as strong as that of mice whose memories had been formed with no interference.

Sheena Josselyn, an associate professor of psychology and physiology at the University of Toronto, said the findings run counter to the longstanding idea that memory formation involves strengthening of synapses between neurons and that this process requires protein synthesis.

“They showed that a memory formed during protein-synthesis inhibition may be artificially (but not naturally) recalled. That is, the memory is still retained in the brain without protein synthesis, but this memory cannot be accessed under normal conditions, suggesting that spines may not be the key keepers of information,” says Josselyn, who was not involved in the research. “The findings are controversial, but many paradigm-shifting papers are.”

Along with the researchers’ previous findings on silent engrams in early Alzheimer’s disease, this study suggests that re-activating certain synapses could help restore some memory recall function in patients with early stage Alzheimer’s disease, Roy says.

The research was funded by the RIKEN Brain Science Institute, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the JPB Foundation.