Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24878277›Full record

ReviewNeurobiology of learning and memory2014

Toward a conceptualization of retrohippocampal contributions to learning and memory.

David J Bucci, Siobhan Robinson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurobiology of learning and memory, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Higher-Order Conditioning and Dopamine: Charting a Path Forward.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. A GluN2B-Selective NMDAR Antagonist Reverses Synapse Loss and Cognitive Impairment Produced by the HIV-1 Protein Tat.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  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

2 authors.

David J BucciDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, United States. Electronic address: david.j.bucci@dartmouth.edu.
Siobhan RobinsonDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH, 44074, United States.

Funding

Functional Neurobiology of the Retrosplenial Cortex During Associative LearningF32MH092991 · NIMH · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI ROBINSON, SIOBHAN · 2010 to 2013
$156k
NIMH NIH HHS F32 MH092991NIMH NIH HHS MH092991
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A wealth of data supports the notion that the hippocampus binds objects and events together in place and time. In support of this function, a cortical circuit that includes the retrosplenial cortex (RSC) and various structures in the parahippocampal region is thought to provide the hippocampus with essential information regarding the physical and temporal context in which the object/event occurs. However, it remains unclear if and how individual components of this so-called 'where' circuit make unique contributions to processing context-related information. Here we focus on the RSC and the postrhinal cortex (POR; homologous with parahippocampal cortex (PHC) in primates), two of the most strongly interconnected components of the where pathway and the foci of an increasing amount of recent research. Much of the behavioral evidence to date suggests that RSC and POR/PHC work closely together as a functional unit. We begin by briefly reviewing studies that have investigated the involvement of RSC and POR/PHC in contextual and spatial learning, both of which involve learning associations and relationships between the individual stimuli that compose an environment (i.e., where information). However, we propose that potential differences have been overlooked because most studies to date have relied on behavioral paradigms and experimental approaches that are not well suited for distinguishing between different aspects of information processing. We then consider the anatomical differences between RSC and POR/PHC and emerging behavioral evidence that gives rise to a working model of how these regions may differentially contribute to hippocampal-dependent learning and memory. We then discuss experimental designs and behavioral methods that may be useful in testing the model. Finally, approaches are described that may be valuable in probing the nature of information processing and neuroplasticity in the myriad of local circuits that are nested within the where pathway.

Indexed as

AnimalsEntorhinal CortexHippocampusHumansLearningMaze LearningMemoryModels, NeurologicalParahippocampal GyrusHippocampusNon-spatialPostrhinalRetrosplenialWhere pathway

Identifiers

PMID24878277
PMCPMC4246017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.