Long-term potentiation

In neuroscience, long-term potentiation (LTP) is the long-lasting strengthening of the connection between two nerve cells. Experimentally, a series of short, high-frequency electric stimulations to a nerve cell synapse can strengthen, or potentiate, that synapse for minutes to hours. In living cells, LTP occurs naturally and can last from hours to days, months, and years.

The biological mehanisms of LTP, largely via the interplay of protein kinases, phosphatases, and gene expression, give rise to synaptic plasticity and provide the foundation for a highly adaptable nervous system. Most neuroscientific learning theories regard LTP and its opposing process, LTD, as the cellular basis of learning and memory.

LTP was discovered in the mammalian hippocampus by Terje Lømo in 1966 and has remained a popular subject of neuroscientific research since. Most modern LTP studies seek to better understand its biology, while other research aims to develop drugs that exploit these biological mechanisms to treat neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease.

Contents

1 History 1.1 Early theories of learning 1.2 Discovery of long-term potentiation 2 Types of LTP 2.1 Associative LTP 2.2 Nonassociative LTP 3 Properties of LTP 4 Phases of LTP 4.1 Early LTP 4.2 Late LTP 5 Retrograde signaling 6 Synaptic tagging 7 LTP modulation 8 LTP and behavioral memory 8.1 NMDA blockade 8.2 Doogie mice 9 Related topics 10 Notes 11 References

History

Early theories of learning

By the turn of the 19th century, neurobiologists had good reason to believe that memories were generally not the product of new nerve cell growth. Scientists generally believed that the number of neurons in the adult brain (roughly 10¹¹) did not increase significantly with age. With this realization came the need to explain how memories were created in the absence of new cell growth.

Among the first neuroscientists to suggest that learning was not the product of new cell growth was the Spanish anatomist Santiago Ramón y Cajal. In 1894 he proposed that memories might be formed by strengthening the connections between existing neurons to improve the effectiveness of their communication. Hebbian theory, introduced by Donald Hebb in 1949, echoed Ramón y Cajal's ideas, and further proposed that cells may grow new connections between each other to enhance their ability to communicate:

Let us assume that the persistence or repetition of a reverberatory activity (or "trace") tends to induce lasting cellular changes that add to its stability.... When an axon of cell A is near enough to excite a cell B and repeatedly or persistently takes part in firing it, some growth process or metabolic change takes place in one or both cells such that A's efficiency, as one of the cells firing B, is increased.Template:Ref

These theories of memory formation were unfortunately foresighted. Neuroscientists were simply not yet equipped with the neurophysiological techniques necessary for elucidating the biological underpinnings of learning in animals. These skills would not come until the latter half of the 20th century, at about the same time as the discovery of long-term potentiation.

Discovery of long-term potentiation

LTP was first observed by Terje Lømo in 1966 in the Oslo, Norway, laboratory of Per AndersenTemplate:Ref. There, Lømo conducted a series of neurophysiological experiments on anesthetized rabbits to explore the role of the hippocampus in short-term memory.

Isolating the connections between two parts of the hippocampus, the perforant pathway and dentate gyrus, Lømo observed the electrical changes in the dentate gyrus elicited by stimulation of the perforant pathway. As expected, a single pulse of electrical stimulation to the perforant pathway elicited an excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP) in the dentate gyrus. What Lømo did not expect was that a high-frequency train of stimulation produced larger, prolonged EPSPs compared to the responses evoked by a single stimulus. This phenomenon was soon dubbed "long-term potentiation".

Timothy Bliss, who joined the Andersen laboratory in 1968, collaborated with Lømo in 1973 to publish the first characterization of LTP in rabbit hippocampus.

Types of LTP

Since its original discovery in the rabbit hippocampus, LTP has been observed in a variety of other neural structures, including the cerebral cortex, cerebellum, amygdala, and many others. The underlying mechanisms of LTP are generally conserved across these different regions, but there are subtle differences in LTP's precise molecular machinery between sites. Very broadly, there are two types of LTP, associative and nonassociative.

Associative LTP

Associative LTP is the molecular analog of associative learning (e.g. classical conditioning). It is the strengthening of the connection between two neurons that have been simultaneously active. To detect the simultaneous activity of the pre- and postsynaptic cells, associative LTP requires a so-called coincidence detector. In many parts of the brain where associative LTP is observed, the NMDA receptor (NMDAR) fills the role of coincidence detector. At rest, the NMDAR's calcium channel is blocked by magnesium; the blockade is relieved only after strong postsynaptic depolarizationTemplate:Ref. The calcium channel is also ligand-gated, so that it only opens when presynaptically-released glutamate binds the receptor. When the NMDAR opens, calcium floods the postsynaptic cell triggering associative LTP.

NMDAR-dependent LTP has been demonstrated in the hippocampus, particularly in the Schaffer collaterals and perforant pathway, and several other brain regions including parts of the amygdalaTemplate:Ref and cerebral cortexTemplate:Ref.

There are several types of associative LTP that do not depend on NMDA receptors. NMDAR-independent LTP has been observed, for example, in the amygdala, where it depends instead on voltage-gated calcium channelsTemplate:Ref.

Nonassociative LTP

Nonassociative LTP is brought about by the repeated application of one stimulus (whereas in associative LTP there are at least two stimuli). At nonassociative synapses, such as those involved in habituation and sensitization, persistent stimulation of the synapse triggers an influx of calcium into the postsynaptic cell. As in associative LTP, calcium signals the beginning of long-term potentiation, but the precise mechanisms of nonassociative LTP are still unknown.

Properties of LTP

NMDA receptor-dependent LTP classically exhibits four main properties: rapid induction, cooperativity, associativity, and input specificity:

• LTP can be rapidly induced by applying one or more brief tetanic stimuli to a presynaptic cell. (A tetanic stimulus is a high-frequency sequence of individual stimulati.)
• LTP can be induced either by strong tetanic stimulation of a single pathway, or cooperatively via the weaker stimulation of many. It is explained by the presence of a stimulus threshold that must be reached in order to induce LTP.
• Associativity refers to the observation that when weak stimulation of a single pathway is insufficient for the induction of LTP, simultaneous strong stimulation of another pathway will induce LTP at both pathways. There is some evidence that associativity and cooperativity share the same underlying cellular mechanism (see Synaptic tagging).
• Once induced, LTP at one synapse is not propagated to adjacent synapses; rather LTP is input specific.

Phases of LTP

LTP is often divided into two phases, an early, protein synthesis-independent phase (E-LTP) that lasts between one and five hours, and a late, protein synthesis-dependent phase (L-LTP) that lasts from days to monthsTemplate:Ref. Broadly, E-LTP produces short-lived synaptic facilitation by making existing postsynaptic glutamate receptors (e.g. AMPA receptors) more sensitive to glutamate.

Conversely, L-LTP results in a pronounced facilitation of the postsynaptic response largely through the synthesis of new proteins. These proteins include glutamate receptors (e.g. AMPAR), transcription factors, and structural proteins that enhance existing synapses and form new connections. There is also considerable evidence that late LTP prompts the postsynaptic synthesis of a retrograde messenger that diffuses to the presynaptic cell increasing the probability of neurotransmitter vesicle release on subsequent stimuli.

Early LTP

E-LTP can be induced experimentally by applying a few trains of tetanic stimulation to the connection between two neuronsTemplate:Ref. Through normal synaptic transmission, this stimulation causes the release of neurotransmitters, particularly glutamate, from the presynaptic terminal onto the postsynaptic cell membrane, where they bind to neurotransmitter receptors embedded in the postsynaptic membrane. Though a single presentation of the stimulus is usually not sufficient to induce LTP, repeated presentations cause the postsynaptic cell to be progressively depolarized. In NMDAR-dependent synapses, this progressive depolarization relieves the magnesium blockade of the NMDA receptor. When the next stimulus is applied, glutamate binds the NMDA receptor and calcium floods the postsynaptic cell, rapidly increasing the intracellular concentration of calcium. It is this rapid rise in calcium concentration that induces E-LTP.

Beyond calcium's critical role in the induction of E-LTP, few downstream molecular events leading to the expression and maintenance of E-LTP are known with certainty. Yet there is considerable evidence that E-LTP induction depends upon the activity of several protein kinases, including calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII), protein kinase C (PKC) Template:RefTemplate:Ref, protein kinase A (PKA)Template:Ref, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)Template:RefTemplate:Ref, and tyrosine kinasesTemplate:Ref.

Postsynaptically, the early phase of LTP is expressed primarily through the enhancement of receptor/channel sensitivity. In NMDA-dependent LTP in the CA1 hippocampus, the endogenous calcium chelator calmodulin rapidly binds calcium as a result of NMDAR openingTemplate:Ref. The calcium-calmodulin complex directly activates CaMKII which 1) phosphorylates voltage-gated potassium channels increasing their excitabilityTemplate:Ref; 2) enhances the activity of existing AMPA receptors; and 3) phosphorylates intracellular AMPARs and activates Syn GAP (a Ras GTPase activating protein) and the MAPK cascade, facilitating the insertion of AMPARs into the postsynaptic membraneTemplate:Ref.

PKA serves a role similar to that of CaMKII, but PKA's effects are more broad. PKA's activity is enhanced during LTP induction by elevated levels of cAMP as a result of calcium's activation of adenylyl cyclase-1. Like CaMKII, PKA phosphorylates voltage-dependent potassium channels and also calcium channels enhancing their excitability to future stimuli. Additionally, PKA phosphorylates intracellular AMPAR stores, facilitating their insertion postsynaptically. PKA may also enhance AMPAR delivery via activation of the MAPK cascade.

While LTP is induced postsynaptically, it is partially expressed presynaptically. One hypothesis of presynaptic facilitation is that enhanced CaMKII activity during early LTP gives rise to CaMKII autophosphorylation and constitutive activation. Persistent CaMKII activity then stimulates NO synthase, leading to the enhanced production of the putative retrograde messenger, NO. Since NO is a diffusable gas, it freely diffuses across the synaptic cleft to the presynaptic cell leading to a chain of molecular events that facilitate the presynaptic response to subsequent stimuli. (See Retrograde signaling for discussion about the identity of the retrograde messenger.)

Late LTP

Late LTP can be experimentally induced by a series of three or more trains of tetanic stimulation spaced roughly 10 minutes apart. Unlike early LTP, late LTP requires gene transcriptionTemplate:RefTemplate:Ref and protein synthesisTemplate:Ref, making it an attractive candidate for the molecular analog of long-term memory.

The synthesis of gene products is driven by kinases which in turn activate transcription factors that mediate gene expression. cAMP response element binding protein-1 (CREB-1) is thought to be the primary transcription factor in the cascade of gene expression that leads to prolonged structural changes to the synapse enhancing its strengthTemplate:Ref. CREB-1 is both necessaryTemplate:Ref and sufficientTemplate:Ref for late LTP. It is active in its phosphorylated form and induces the transcription of so-called immediate-early genes, including c-fos and c-junTemplate:Ref. Ultimately, the products of CREB-1-mediated transcription and protein synthesis give rise to new building materials for the synaptic connection between pre- and postsynaptic cell.

During L-LTP, constitutively active CaMKII activates a related kinase, CaMKIV. Additionally, enhanced Ca²⁺ levels during late LTP increase cAMP synthesis via adenylyl cyclase-1, further activating PKA and resulting in the phosphorylation and activation of MAPKTemplate:Ref. Facilitated by cAMP, both CaMKII and CaMKIV translocate to the cell nucleus along with PKA and MAPK (mediated by PKA)Template:Ref, where they phosphorylate CREB-1Template:Ref.

There is also some evidence that L-LTP is mediated in part by nitric oxide (NO)Template:Ref. In particular, NO may activate guanylyl cyclase, leading to the production of cyclic GMP and activation protein kinase G (PKG), which phosphorylates CREB-1. PKG may also cause the release of Ca²⁺ from ryanodine receptor-gated intracellular stores, increasing the Ca²⁺ concentration which activates other previously mentioned kinase cascades to further activate CREB-1.

Retrograde signaling

Retrograde signalling is a theoretical concept that arises from the question: "If LTP is induced postsynaptically, but expressed presynaptically, how does the presynaptic terminal "know" that LTP has been induced?" The obvious answer is that there must be some communication "backwards" across the synapse, that is, in the retrograde direction from the postsynaptic to the presynaptic side. This concept led to a flurry of work in the early 1990's to demonstrate the existance of a retrograde messenger and also to identify such a messenger. A number of candidates were examined including carbon monoxideTemplate:Ref, platelet-activating factorTemplate:RefTemplate:Ref, arachidonic acid, and nitric oxideTemplate:RefTemplate:Ref.

Perhaps unfortunately for the retrograde signaling hypothesis, subsequent work has strongly established that LTP, at least early LTP, is expressed entirely postsynaptically (cf. Malenka and Bear, 2004). However, there is still life in the retrograde signalling hypothesis, since it has been demonstrated that induction of LTP may involve a retrograde messenger, since contrary to dogma, LTP induction does not appear to be entirely postsynaptic (Pavlidis, et al., 2000).

Synaptic tagging

The gene expression and protein synthesis that mediate the long-term changes of LTP generally take place in the cell body, but LTP is synapse-specific; LTP induced at one synapse does not propagate to adjacent inactive synapses. Therefore, the cell is posed with the difficult problem of synthesizing plasticity-related products in the nucleus and cell body, but ensuring they only reach synapses that have received LTP-inducing stimuli.

The synthesis of a "synaptic tag" at a given synapse after LTP-inducing stimuli may serve to capture plasticity-related proteins shipped cell-wide from the nucleusTemplate:Ref. Studies of LTP in the marine snail Aplysia californica have implicated synaptic tagging as a mechanism for the input-specificity of LTPTemplate:RefTemplate:Ref. Given two widely separated synapses, an LTP-inducing stimulus at one synapse drives several signaling cascades (described previously) that initiates gene expression in the cell nucleus. At the same synapse (but not the unstimulated synapse), local protein synthesis creates a short-lived (less than three hours) synaptic tag. The products of gene expression are shipped globally throughout the cell, but are only captured by synapses that express the synaptic tag. Thus only the input receiving LTP-inducing stimuli is potentiated, demonstrating LTP's input-specificity.

Synaptic tagging may also give rise to LTP's associativity. If one synapse is excited with LTP-inducing stimulation while a separate synapse is only weakly stimulated, both synapses will undergo LTP, while weak stimulation alone is insufficient to induce LTP at either synapse. While weak stimuli are unable to induce gene expression in the cell nucleus, they do prompt the synthesis of a synaptic tag. Simultaneous strong stimulation of a separate pathway, capable of inducing nuclear gene expression, then prompts the production of plasticity-related proteins, which are shipped cell-wide. With both synapses expressing the synaptic tag, both capture the protein products resulting in the induction of LTP in both the strongly stimulated and weakly stimulated pathways.

The synaptic tag hypothesis may also explain LTP's cooperativity. While weak stimulation of a single pathway is insufficient to induce LTP, the simultaneous weak stimulation of two pathways is sufficient. As noted previously, weak stimulation initiates the synthesis of a synaptic tag, but is insufficient to trigger late LTP and thus CREB-1-mediated gene expression. But simultaneous weak input converges on kinases that sufficiently activate CREB-1 thereby inducing the synthesis of plasticity-related proteins, which are shipped out cell-wide as described previously. Since a synaptic tag has been synthesized at both synapses, both capture the products of gene expression and both are subsequently potentiated.

LTP modulation

LTP modulators, adapted from (10541462).

Modulator	Putative target
DA receptors	cAMP, MAPK amplification
β-adrenergic receptors	cAMP, MAPK amplification
mGluR	PKC, MAPK amplification
NO synthase	Guanylyl cyclase, PKG, NMDAR

In addition to the signalling pathways described above, hippocampal LTP can be modulated by a variety of molecules. For example, the steroid hormone estradiol is one of several molecules that enhances LTP by driving CREB-1 phosphorylation and subsequent dendritic spine growth (9920677). Additionally, β-adrenergic receptor agonists such as norepinephrine contribute to the protein synthesis-dependent late phase of LTP (12770561). Nitric oxide synthase also plays an important role, leading to the up-regulation of nitric oxide and subsequent activation of guanylyl cyclase and PKG, as described previously (10575022). Similarly, activation of dopamine receptors enhances LTP via the cAMP/PKA signaling pathway (1833673)(8922403).

LTP and behavioral memory

The mere fact that cultured synapses can undergo long-term potentiation when stimulated by electrodes says little about LTP's relation to memory. Several studies have provided some insight as to whether LTP is a requirement for memory.

NMDA blockade

Richard Morris provided some of the first evidence that LTP was indeed required for the formation of memories [1] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2869411). He tested the spatial memory of two groups of rats, one whose hippocampi were bathed in the NMDA receptor blocker APV, and the other acting as a control group. (Incidentally, the hippocampus, where LTP was originally observed, is required for spatial learning.) Both groups were then subjected to the Morris water maze, in which rats were placed into a pool of murky water and tested on how quickly they could locate a platform hidden beneath the water's surface.

Rats in the control group were able to locate the platform and escape from the pool, whereas the ability of APV-treated rats to complete the task was significantly impaired. Moreover, when slices of the hippocampus were taken from both groups of rats, LTP was easily induced in controls, but could not be induced in the brains of APV-treated rats. This provided some evidence that the NMDA receptor — and thus LTP — was somehow involved with at least some types of learning and memory.

Similarly, Susumu Tonegawa has demonstrated that a specific region of the hippocampus, namely CA1, is crucial to the formation of spatial memories [2] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8980239). So-called place cells located in this region are responsible for creating "place fields" of the rat's environment, which may be roughly equated with maps of the rat's surroundings. The accuracy of these maps determines how well a rat learns about its environment, and thus how well it can navigate about it.

Tonegawa found that by impairing the NMDA receptor, specifically by genetically removing the NMDAR1 subunit in the CA1 region, the place fields generated were substantially less specific than those of controls. That is, rats produced faulty spatial maps when their NMDA receptors were impaired. As expected, these rats performed very poorly on spatial tasks compared to controls, providing more support to the notion that LTP is the underlying mechanism of spatial learning.

Doogie mice

Enhanced NMDA receptor activity in the hippocampus has also been shown to produce enhanced LTP and an overall improvement in spatial learning. Joe Tsien (http://www.bumc.bu.edu/www/busm/pharmacology/tsien/index.htm) produced a line of mice with enhanced NMDA receptor function by overexpressing the NR2B subunit in the hippocampus [3] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11640933). These smart mice, nicknamed "Doogie mice" after the prodigious doctor Doogie Howser, had larger long-term potentiation and excelled at spatial learning tasks, once again suggesting LTP's involvement in the formation of hippocampal-dependent memories [4] (http://www.abc.net.au/quantum/stories/s103200.htm).

Related topics

• learning
• long-term depression
• memory

Notes

1. Template:NoteTemplate:Book reference
2. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 12740104
3. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 6325946
4. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9403688
5. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 2446147
6. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10575047
7. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10575022
8. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10467587
9. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9114065
10. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 2549638
11. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10844013
12. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9235897
13. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 11145972
14. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference PMID 10545144
15. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 2549423
16. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10541462
17. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 14993459
18. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 8066450
19. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 7923378
20. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 3401749
21. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 11378299
22. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 2141668
23. Template:Note{Journal reference issue | Author=Bartsch D, Casadio A, Karl KA, Serodio P, Kandel ER | Title=CREB1 encodes a nuclear activator, a repressor, and a cytoplasmic modulator that form a regulatory unit critical for long-term facilitation. | Journal=Cell | Year=1998 | Pages=211-23 | Volume=95 | Issue=2 }} PMID 9790528
24. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 11306573
25. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10964936
26. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9808472
27. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9920677
28. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10575022
29. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 11331380
30. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 8906580
31. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 8114914
32. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 8978607
33. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference PMID 9932440
34. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9020359
35. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 9428516
36. Template:NoteTemplate:Journal reference issue PMID 10535740

References

• Deadwyler SA, Dunwiddie T, Lynch G. "A critical level of protein synthesis is required for long-term potentiation." Synapse. 1987;1(1):90-5. PMID 3505366
• Frey U, Morris RG. "Synaptic tagging and long-term potentiation." Nature. 1997 Feb 6;385(6616):533-6. PMID 9020359
• Bennett MR. "The concept of long term potentiation of transmission at synapses." Prog Neurobiol. 2000 Feb;60(2):109-37. PMID 10639051 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10639051&dopt=Abstract)
• Collingridge GL, Kehl SJ, McLennan H. "Excitatory amino acids in synaptic transmission in the Schaffer collateral-commissural pathway of the rat hippocampus." J Physiol. 1983 Jan;334:33-46. PMID 6306230 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6306230&dopt=Abstract)
• Malenka RC, Bear MF. LTP and LTD: an embarrassment of riches. Neuron 2004 Sep 30;44(1):5-21. [5] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15450156&query_hl=4)
• Martin SJ, Grimwood PD, Morris RG. "Synaptic plasticity and memory: an evaluation of the hypothesis." Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:649-711. PMID 10845078 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10845078)
• McNaughton BL, Douglas RM, Goddard GV. "Synaptic enhancement in fascia dentata: cooperativity among coactive afferents." Brain Res. 1978 Nov 24;157(2):277-93. PMID 719524 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=719524&dopt=Abstract)
• Murphy GG, Glanzman DL. "Enhancement of sensorimotor connections by conditioning-related stimulation in Aplysia depends upon postsynaptic Ca2+." Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Sep 3;93(18):9931-6. PMID 8790434 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8790434&dopt=Abstract) (full text PDF (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/93/18/9931.pdf))
• Morris RG, Anderson E, Lynch GS, Baudry M. "Selective impairment of learning and blockade of long-term potentiation by an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, AP5." Nature. 1986 Feb 27-Mar 5;319(6056):774-6. PMID 2869411 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2869411)
• McHugh TJ, Blum KI, Tsien JZ, Tonegawa S, Wilson MA. "Impaired hippocampal representation of space in CA1-specific NMDAR1 knockout mice." Cell. 1996 Dec 27;87(7):1147-8. PMID 8980239 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8980239)
• Pavlidis, P., Mongomery, J. and Madison, D.V. (2000). Presynaptic Protein Kinase Activity Supports Long-Term Potentiation at Synapses Between Individual Hippocampal Neurons. Journal of Neuroscience 20, 4497 4505. [6] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10844019&query_hl=6)
• Tang YP, Wang H, Feng R, Kyin M, Tsien JZ. "Differential effects of enrichment on learning and memory function in NR2B transgenic mice." Neuropharmacology. 2001 Nov;41(6):779-90. PMID 11640933 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11640933)
• Hebb, D.O. (1949) The organization of behavior. Wiley, New York.

zh:长时程增强现象