Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2019 Jun 26;2:242. doi: 10.1038/s42003-019-0470-y

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 1 — Proactive and retroactive interference and parallel consolidation of associative memories after single-trial conditioning. a Simplified time-line of dual appetitive conditioning paradigm. b Animals showed a greater response to the first conditioned stimulus (CS), gamma-nonalactone (GNL), after first training alone (n = 40) or when second training occurred during the non-lapse (1 h: n = 32) but not the lapse (2 h: n = 29) compared to naïve controls (n = 35). Responses to the second conditioned stimulus, amyl acetate (AA), were greater in animals that received second training alone (n = 24) or second training during the lapse (2 h: n = 31) but not the non-lapse (1 h: n = 32) compared with naïve controls (n = 40). Violin plots show density of data extending from minimum to maximum values. Internal boxplots show median and interquartile range (first and third quartile). Whiskers represent minimum to maximum values. Circles show the mean. c Simplified time-line of appetitive followed by aversive training. d Animals showed a greater response to the appetitive conditioned stimulus (gamma-nonalactone) after appetitive training alone (n = 30) or when aversive training occurred during the non-lapse (1 h: n = 29) but not the lapse (2 h: n = 30) compared with naïve controls (n = 28). Responses to the aversive conditioned stimulus, L-serine (L-s), were lower in animals that received aversive training during the lapse (2 h: n = 29), non-lapse (n = 30) and after aversive training alone (n = 30) compared with naïve controls (n = 29). e Simplified time-line of aversive followed by appetitive training. f Animals showed a lower response to the aversive conditioned stimulus after aversive training alone (n = 20) or when appetitive training occurred during the non-lapse (1 h: n = 20) but not the lapse (2 h: n = 20) compared with naïve controls (n = 20). Responses to the appetitive conditioned stimulus were greater in animals that received appetitive training during the lapse (2 h: n = 20), non-lapse (n = 16) and after appetitive training alone (n = 20) compared with naïve controls (n = 20)