Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21700715›Full record

ArticleLearning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.)2011

Contributions of area Te2 to rat recognition memory.

Jonathan Weng-Thim Ho, Katherine Elizabeth Narduzzo, Alexandra Outram, Christopher John Tinsley, Jeremy Martin Henley, Elizabeth Clea Warburton, Malcolm Watson Brown

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Visuomotor control in mice and primates.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Visual recognition memory: a view from V1.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2015
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. In search of a recognition memory engram.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2015
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Network analysis of corticocortical connections reveals ventral and dorsal processing streams in mouse visual cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2012
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jonathan Weng-Thim HoMRC Centre for Synaptic Plasticity, School of Physiology and Pharmacology, School of Medical Sciences, University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TD, United Kingdom.
Katherine Elizabeth Narduzzo
Alexandra Outram
Christopher John Tinsley
Jeremy Martin Henley
Elizabeth Clea Warburton
Malcolm Watson Brown
Brown University · USNottingham Trent University · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council G0401403Medical Research Council G0601810Medical Research Council G0601810(80974)Medical Research Council G9713086Wellcome Trust 083721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ablations and local intracerebral infusions were used to determine the role of rat temporal association cortex (area Te2) in object recognition memory, so that this role might be compared with that of the adjacent perirhinal cortex (PRH). Bilateral lesions of Te2 impaired recognition memory measured by preferential exploration of a novel rather than a familiar object at delays ≥20 min but not after a 5-min delay. Local infusion bilaterally into Te2 of (1) CNQX to block AMPA/kainate receptors or (2) lidocaine to block axonal transmission or (3) AP5, an NMDA receptor antagonist, impaired recognition memory after a 24-h but not a 20-min delay. In PRH all these manipulations impair recognition memory after a 20-min as well as a 24-h delay. UBP302, a GluK1 kainate receptor antagonist, impaired recognition memory after a 24-h but not a 20-min delay, contrasting with its action in PRH where it impairs only shorter-term (20 min) recognition memory. Also in contrast to PRH, infusion of the muscarinic receptor antagonist scopolamine was without effect. The Te2 impairments could not readily be ascribed to perceptual deficits. Hence, Te2 is essential for object recognition memory at delays >5 or 20 min. Thus, at long delays both area Te2 and PRH are necessary for object recognition memory.

Indexed as

AnimalsMaleMemoryRatsRecognition, PsychologyTemporal Lobe

Identifiers

PMID21700715
PMCPMC3125610
OpenAlexW2105848971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.