Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41200235›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

Striatal and hippocampal contributions to instrumental learning in the mouse using high-resolution behavioral monitoring and fMRI.

Eyal Bergmann, Daniela Lichtman, Admir Resulaj, Guy Yona, Ornit Nahman, Dmitry Rinberg, Itamar Kahn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Surface mapping of gastric motor functions using MRI: a comparative study between humans and rats.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2024
    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

7 authors.

Eyal BergmannDepartment of Neuroscience, Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.
Daniela LichtmanDepartment of Neuroscience, Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1204-7108
Admir ResulajNeuroscience Institute, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2589-6360
Guy YonaDepartment of Neuroscience, Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0695-0827
Ornit NahmanDepartment of Neuroscience, Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5836-6724
Dmitry RinbergNeuroscience Institute, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4888-9745
Itamar KahnDepartment of Neuroscience, Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1895-8677

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mammalian brain orchestrates goal-directed behavior through complex interactions between multiple memory systems, with the striatum and hippocampus playing pivotal interrelated roles. A central open question is the extent to which distinct memory signals from these systems drive learning to achieve desired goals and, once those are learned, maintain performance. Here, we used an MRI-compatible platform to obtain whole-brain functional imaging of head-fixed mice as they learn to perform a lick go/no-go odor discrimination task from the naïve state to task proficiency. Behaving mouse functional MRI (fMRI) acquired over a period of several days allowed us to characterize distributed activity as the animals learned the task, demonstrating differential involvement of the striatal and hippocampal memory systems accounting for correct and incorrect task responses. A consideration of the contribution of striatal sub-regions revealed that the responses of the dorsal striatum were correlated with improvement in reaction time, while responses in the ventral striatum were correlated with learning the task and maintaining task performance. In contrast, the dorsal hippocampus showed depressed responses to correct licks to the target odor (hits) and increased responses to incorrect licks to the non-target odor (false alarms). False alarms that were correlated with positive hippocampal responses had longer reaction times and emerged after the mouse learned the task, implicating the hippocampus in driving false memory responses. These results show that behaviorally beneficial actions were correlated with the striatum with a competing involvement of the hippocampus driving erroneous actions, setting the stage to study circuit-based mechanisms of false memory in the mouse.

Indexed as

fMRIgoal-directed behaviorhippocampuslearning and memorystriatum

Identifiers

PMID41200235
PMCPMC12587051

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.