MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Viral Tracing Identifies Parallel Disynaptic Pathways to the Hippocampus

2013· article· en· W1976633716 on OpenAlexafffund
Judy A. Prasad, Yogita Chudasama

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceHippocampusEntorhinal cortexInfralimbic cortexRetrosplenial cortexAnterior cingulate cortexCortex (anatomy)ThalamusBiologyPrefrontal cortexCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrophysiological and lesion studies in rodents have shown that the dorsal (septal) and ventral (temporal) segments of the hippocampus have functional specializations that can be understood in terms of their anatomical connections with distinct brain areas. Here we explore the circuitry associated with the hippocampus using the pseudorabies virus-Bartha strain (PRV-Bartha) tracer in the rat to examine both direct (first-order) and indirect (second-order) projections to the hippocampus. Based on analysis of PRV-Bartha infection density, we demonstrate two parallel pathways from the limbic cortex to the hippocampus. A dorsal "spatial cognition" pathway provides disynaptic input from the retrosplenial, anterior cingulate, and orbital cortex to the dorsal hippocampus, with potential synaptic relays in the anterior thalamic nuclei and dorsolateral entorhinal cortex. A ventral "executive control" pathway provides disynaptic input from the prelimbic, infralimbic, and orbital cortex to the ventral hippocampus, with potential synaptic relays in the midline thalamic nuclei and the rostral caudomedial entorhinal cortex. These data suggest a new anatomical framework for understanding the functional interactions between the cortex and hippocampus, especially in cognitive disorders that involve both structures, such as frontotemporal dementia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207