Plasticity in D1-Like Receptor Expression Is Associated with Different Components of Cognitive Processes

Dopamine D1-like receptors consist of D1 (D1A) and D5 (D1B) receptors and play a key role in working memory. However, their possibly differential contribution to working memory is unclear. We combined a working memory training protocol with a stepwise increase of cognitive subcomponents and real-time RT-PCR analysis of dopamine receptor expression in pigeons to identify molecular changes that accompany training of isolated cognitive subfunctions. In birds, the D1-like receptor family is extended and consists of the D1A, D1B, and D1D receptors. Our data show that D1B receptor plasticity follows a training that includes active mental maintenance of information, whereas D1A and D1D receptor plasticity in addition accompanies learning of stimulus-response associations. Plasticity of D1-like receptors plays no role for processes like response selection and stimulus discrimination. None of the tasks altered D2 receptor expression. Our study shows that different cognitive components of working memory training have distinguishable effects on D1-like receptor expression

Ionotropic glutamate receptor expression during embryonic stem cell differentiation

Um die Rolle ionotroper Glutamatrezeptoren in der Entwicklung zu untersuchen, wurde in dieser Arbeit ihre Expression in differenzierenden embryonalen Stammzellen (ES-Zellen) systematisch analysiert, aus denen sich leicht reine Populationen definierter Zelltypen ge-winnen lassen, z. B. neuroepitheliale Vorläuferzellen und neurale Stammzellen. Die mRNA-Transkripte der Untereinheiten GluR1, GluR3, GluR4flip, GluR6, GluR7, KA1, KA2, NR1, NR2C und NR2D konnten in ES-Zellen nachgewiesen werden. Außerdem konnte die Expression der Kainatrezeptoruntereinheiten KA2 und GluR7 auf Proteinebene nachgewiesen werden. Versuche, glutamatrezeptorvermittelte Ströme in ES-Zellen zu messen, waren allerdings erfolglos. Dies könnte bedeuten, daß Kainatrezeptoren in Stammzellen keine Ionenkanäle bilden, sondern z. B. an G-Proteine gekoppelt sind. Quantitative Expressionsanalyse in differenzierenden ES-Zellen deutete darauf hin, daß GluR7 und KA2 eine Rolle in der Entwicklung spielen

Differences of D1-like mRNA levels in the NCL (A) and the anterior forebrain (aFB; B) between the trained groups.

<p>In the NCL and in the aFB, D1A receptor expression levels decreased in the S-R and in the SMTS groups, and increased to control levels after training in the DMTS group. D1B receptor expression increased in both areas in the DMTS group. D1D receptor expression levels decreased in the S-R and the SMTS groups in both areas, and increased to control levels in the NCL while increasing above control levels in the aFB. Thus, a rigid training program that involved a reward-dependent learning of an association between external stimuli and own responses resulted in a down-regulation of the expression of D1A and D1D. D1B expression is only affects after DMTS training. A sole comparison of control and DMTS tasks would have resulted in the wrong conclusion that a DMTS procedure increases D1B expression levels but has no effect on D1A or D1D. All data is presented as mean ± SEM; n = 10 each group. All statistical analyses were only performed on the original data (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0036484#pone-0036484-g003" target="_blank">Figure 3</a>). Significant differences between groups are marked with asterisks (*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001).</p

Schematic depiction of the logical structure of the behavioral approach.

<p>Expression levels of dopamine receptors are tested in different animal groups under control conditions (no operant behavioral task involved), and during execution of an S-R, an SMTS, or a DMTS task. Much like Russian “Matryoshka” dolls, each of the tasks involves the cognitive components of the previous one, but adds new components that are depicted on the right side of each box.</p

Primers used for real-time RT-PCR.

<p>The primers were used for quantitative RT-PCR. Each primer pair binds specifically the indicated gene without cross-reactions. The obtained fragments were verified by sequence analysis.</p

Comparison of pigeon DA receptor probe sequences to gene sequences in chicken (c) and human (h).

<p>Data is presented as x/y (%), with x the number of identical bases and y the total length of the fragment followed by the percentage value of sequence identity. Similarities to pigeon sequences differ between chicken and human and are generally larger for chicken sequences. For the D1D probe only low correspondences were detected to the D1B/D5 gene, while high correlations were found with the chicken D1D gene. Empty boxes indicate absence of any significant identities.</p

Schematic illustration of the different paradigms for the animal groups in cognitive training.

<p>(A) Control group without training in an operant task. (B) S-R task. During training with colored operant keys, each trial started with the presentation of either a green or a red stimulus on one of the three keys. After 15 correct pecks the REWARD phase started with 3 s food access. This was followed by an intertrial interval (ITI) before the next trial started. (C) SMTS task. Training in the simultaneous matching-to-sample task always started with the presentation of either a green or red stimulus as the SAMPLE on the central key. 15 pecks onto this directly started the CHOICE period, where the pigeons had to peck the lateral key that matched the color of the sample. During this phase all keys were simultaneously illuminated. No maintaining of information was required. A single correct peck started the REWARD phase with 3 s food access. This was followed by an ITI before the next trial started. (D) DMTS task. During training of the delayed matching-to-sample task each trial started with the presentation of either a green or red stimulus as the SAMPLE on the central key. 15 pecks onto this started a 4 s DELAY period during which the animals had to memorize the sample color. Then, the lateral keys lit and started the CHOICE period, where the pigeons had to peck the lateral key that matched the color of the sample. A single correct peck started the REWARD phase with 3 s food access. This was followed by an ITI before the next trial started.</p

Quantification of dopamine receptor (DAR) mRNA levels in the NCL (A) and the anterior forebrain (aFB; B) of the control and the trained groups.

<p>Expression of different DA receptors at the mRNA level is shown relative to the expression of the housekeeping gene histone H3.3B (mean ± SEM; n = 10 each group). Significant differences between groups are marked with asterisks (*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001).</p

Plasticity in D1-like receptor expression is associated with different components of cognitive processes

Dopamine D1-like receptors consist of D1 (D1A) and D5 (D1B) receptors and play a key role in working memory. However, their possibly differential contribution to working memory is unclear. We combined a working memory training protocol with a stepwise increase of cognitive subcomponents and real-time RT-PCR analysis of dopamine receptor expression in pigeons to identify molecular changes that accompany training of isolated cognitive subfunctions. In birds, the D1-like receptor family is extended and consists of the D1A, D1B, and D1D receptors. Our data show that D1B receptor plasticity follows a training that includes active mental maintenance of information, whereas D1A and D1D receptor plasticity in addition accompanies learning of stimulus-response associations. Plasticity of D1-like receptors plays no role for processes like response selection and stimulus discrimination. None of the tasks altered D2 receptor expression. Our study shows that different cognitive components of working memory training have distinguishable effects on D1-like receptor expression