4.3 Article

Processing of spatial and non-spatial information reveals functional homogeneity along the dorso-ventral axis of CA3, but not CA1

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF LEARNING AND MEMORY
卷 111, 期 -, 页码 56-64

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2014.03.001

关键词

Dorsal; Ventral; Hippocampus; CA1; CA3; Recognition memory; Arc (Arg3.1); Immediate-early gene (IEG)

资金

  1. Mercator Stiftung
  2. International Graduate School of Neurosciences (IGSN) of the RUB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ventral hippocampus is thought to principally contribute to emotional memory, while its dorsal part would be more involved in spatial processes. However, few studies have investigated ventral hippocampal function in spatial or non-spatial memories devoid of strong emotional components, and conflicting results have emerged regarding the role of the dorsal hippocampus in non-spatial (object) recognition memory. Moreover, even fewer reports have dissociated the contribution of the hippocampal subfields CM and CA3 to those processes, despite growing evidence of a functional segregation between these subfields. In a recent study, we detected the immediate-early gene Arc, used as a marker of neuronal activity, during spontaneous spatial and non-spatial recognition memory tasks, and showed that dorsal CA3 was spatially tuned while dorsal CA1 processed spatial and non-spatial information to the same extent (Beer, Chwiesko, Kitsukawa, & Sauvage, 2013). Here, we analyze the pattern of Arc expression detected in ventral CA1 and CM to determine their role in spatial or non-spatial recognition memory, and investigate whether ventral CA1 and CA3 activation differs from that of their dorsal counterparts. We report that ventral CA1 and CM are recruited for both spatial and non-spatial memories, but more strongly for spatial memory (e.g. were spatially tuned), and that CA3 is functionally homogeneous along the dorso-ventral axis, but not CA1. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据