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

. 2010 Jan 20;30(3):832–837. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4145-09.2010

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

Copyright © 2010 the authors 0270-6474/10/300832-06$15.00/0

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 3. — Effects of IL stimulation during immediate extinction training on long-term extinction memory. A, A representative image showing a coronal section from a rat with a stimulating electrode in the IL. B, Location of stimulation sites in the IL for the immediate unpaired-stimulation group, immediate paired-stimulation group, immediate stimulation-only group, delayed unpaired-stimulation group, and immediate M2-stimulation group [modified from Paxinos and Watson (1998)]. C, Percentage of freezing during conditioning. Rats were given five CS–US conditioning trials. All groups showed robust freezing in the last conditioning trial. D, Percentage of freezing during extinction training. The immediate paired-stimulation group (I-PAIRED) and M2-stimulation group (M2-STIM) received IL or M2 stimulation at 100 ms after CS onset during immediate extinction training, respectively. The immediate unpaired-stimulation group (I-UNPAIRED) and delayed unpaired-stimulation groups (D-UNPAIRED) received explicitly unpaired IL stimulation and tones at corresponding time points. The immediate no-stimulation and delayed no-stimulation groups received extinction training at 15 min (I-NO-STIM) or 24 h (D-NO-STIM) after conditioning, but never received IL stimulation. In addition, the stimulation-only group (I-STIM) received IL stimulation in the absence of CS presentation. All groups showed a similar pattern of reduced freezing, except for the I-STIM group. E, Averaged percentage of freezing across three test trials. The I-PAIRED group froze significantly less than other groups, but did not differ from the D-NO-STIM or D-UNPAIRED groups. *p < 0.05. All data are presented as means ± SEM.