Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Differential auditory fear conditioning in sham versus BNST-lesioned rats. A, Experimental paradigm. B, NeuN immunoreactivity in coronal sections of sham (left) versus BNST-lesioned rats (right). C, Percentage time freezing (average ± SEM) in response to the CS+ (filled circles) and CS− (empty circles) during fear conditioning (left), during exposure to the training context without tones (middle), and during the recall test (right) in sham (n = 28; C1, black) versus BNST-lesioned (n = 18; C2, red) rats.
- Figure 2.
BNST lesions abolish behavioral heterogeneity related to discrimination abilities. A, Percentage time freezing in response to the CS+ (filled circles) and CS− (empty circles) in individual sham (black; n = 28) versus BNST-lesioned (red; n = 18) rats during fear conditioning (left), during exposure to the training context without tones (middle), and during the recall test (right). Lines indicate averages. B, Frequency distribution of discrimination scores in sham (black) versus BNST-lesioned (red) rats. C, Comparison between BNST-lesioned rats (red; n = 18) and sham rats with high (black bars; n = 10) or low (white bars; n = 18) discrimination scores in percentage time freezing (left y-axis) to training context (Ctx) and to CS+ and CS− during the recall test, as well as time in closed arms of EPM (right y-axis). D, E, Discrimination score (y-axis) versus freezing to training context (x-axis, D) or time in closed arms (x-axis, E).
Additional Files
Supplemental Data
Files in this Data Supplement:
- supplemental material - Supplemental Material
