Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21707792›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2011

Perirhinal cortex lesions uncover subsidiary systems in the rat for the detection of novel and familiar objects.

Mathieu M Albasser, Eman Amin, Mihaela D Iordanova, Malcolm W Brown, John M Pearce, John P Aggleton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Visual recognition in rhesus monkeys requires area TE but not TEO.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Neuroprotection of Tropical Fruit Juice Mixture via the Reduction of iNOS Expression and CRH Level inEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. In search of a recognition memory engram.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2015
    Review
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Mathieu M AlbasserSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, 70 Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, Wales, UK. AlbasserM@cf.ac.uk
Eman Amin
Mihaela D Iordanova
Malcolm W Brown
John M Pearce
John P Aggleton

Funding

Wellcome Trust WT087855
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study compared the impact of perirhinal cortex lesions on tests of object recognition. Object recognition was tested directly by looking at the preferential exploration of novel objects over simultaneously presented familiar objects. Object recognition was also tested indirectly by presenting just novel objects or just familiar objects, and recording exploration levels. Rats with perirhinal cortex lesions were severely impaired at discriminating a novel object from a simultaneously presented familiar object (direct test), yet displayed normal levels of exploration to novel objects presented on their own and showed normal declines in exploration times for familiar objects that were repeatedly presented (indirect tests). This effective reduction in the exploration of familiar objects after perirhinal cortex lesions points to the sparing of some recognition mechanisms. This possibility led us to determine whether rats with perirhinal cortex lesions can overcome their preferential exploration deficits when given multiple object familiarisation trials prior to that same (familiar) object being paired with a novel object. It was found that after multiple familiarisation trials, objects could now successfully be recognised as familiar by rats with perirhinal cortex lesions, both following a 90-min delay (the longest delay tested) and when object recognition was tested in the dark after familiarisation trials in the light. These latter findings reveal: (i) the presumed recruitment of other regions to solve recognition memory problems in the absence of perirhinal cortex tissue; and (ii) that these additional recognition mechanisms require more familiarisation trials than perirhinal-based recognition mechanisms.

Indexed as

AnimalsBehavior, AnimalCerebral CortexExploratory BehaviorMaleMaze LearningNeuropsychological TestsPattern Recognition, VisualRatsRecognition, Psychology

Identifiers

PMID21707792
PMCPMC3170480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.