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

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

The acquisition of new memory is required for retroactive interference. a Time-line of backwards conditioning (BW) paradigm. b BW presentation of sucrose and amyl acetate (AA) does not elicit a significantly greater response to the conditioned stimulus (CS) compared with naïve controls when tested at 24 h (BW: n = 24, naïve: n = 21). 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 BW presentation of quinine and L-serine (L-s) does not induce an aversive memory (BW: n = 19, naïve: n = 20). d Time-line of BW with sucrose and amyl acetate during the lapse of the first appetitive memory (gamma-nonalactone (GNL) paired with sucrose). e BW during the lapse did not affect long-term memory compared with naïve controls (2 h: n = 22, first training alone: n = 21, naïve: n = 24). f Time-line of BW with quinine and L-serine during the lapse of the first appetitive memory (gamma-nonalactone paired with sucrose). g BW during the lapse did not affect long-term memory compared with naïve controls (2 h: n = 20, first training alone: n = 20, naïve: n = 20)