Recent reports have raised concerns about the ability of long-term potentiation (LTP) to account for associative learning and memory. In this paper, we review the many mechanistic similarities between one form of associative learning, Pavlovian fear conditioning, and amygdaloid LTP. We then address many of the criticisms levied against LTP within the framework of fear conditioning. We believe that many of the apparent discrepancies between LTP and behavior can be generally accounted for by a failure to appreciate that learned behavior is supported by multiple synapses in an extensive network of brain structures. We conclude that LTP remains a viable substrate for memory.
Peer Reviewed
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61946/1/corcoranLM02.pdf