Skip to main content
. 2005 Jun 8;25(23):5604–5610. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5051-04.2005

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

CPEB phosphorylation depends on the LTP induction paradigm. A, Hippocampal slice physiology of slices tetanized with either 1 × 100 Hz or 4 × 100 Hz stimulation. Both paradigms induced hippocampal LTP as measured by the fEPSP slope (t = 45 min; 1 × 100 Hz LTP fEPSP slope, 1.42 ± 0.1, n = 4; 4 × 100 Hz LTP fEPSP slope, 1.71 ± 0.11, n = 9). Arrows indicate when the tetanization was applied. B, Representative Western blots of hippocampal CA1 regions probed with phospho-CPEB, total CPEB, phospho-DARPP-32, total DARPP-32, and tubulin antibodies. Control slices (C) versus LTP slices (L) are compared. C, Densitized results of Western blots from slices stimulated with 1 × 100 Hz. CPEB phosphorylation significantly increased only at 5 min (n = 11; p < 0.001) and returned to baseline by 10 min (n = 7). DARPP-32 phosphorylation did not increase at any time point. D, Densitized results of Western blots from slices stimulated with 4 × 100 Hz. This protocol elicited significant increases in CPEB phosphorylation at 5 min (n = 10; ***p < 0.001), 10 min (n = 7; ***p < 0.001), and 30 min (n = 11; *p < 0.05) after tetanization. DARPP-32 phosphorylation also increased with this protocol at 5 min (n = 9; ***p < 0.001) and 10 min (n = 7; **p < 0.01) after LTP induction.