The lateral septum as a regulator of hippocampal theta oscillations and defensive behavior in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hippocampal theta oscillations are linked to various processes, including locomotion, learning and memory, and defense and affect. The lateral septum (LS) has been implicated in the generation of the hippocampal theta rhythm, but its precise role in this process is not well understood. Here, we investigated the effects of direct pharmacological inhibition or disinhibition of the dorsal LS (dLS) on the frequency of hippocampal theta activity elicited by stimulation of the reticular formation in urethane-anesthetized rats. We found that bilateral infusions of the GABAA receptor agonist muscimol into the dLS significantly increased theta frequency. Strikingly, intra-dLS infusions of the GABAA receptor antagonist GABAzine largely abolished reticularly elicited theta activity. We also locally injected these same compounds into the medial septum (MS) to test for neuroanatomical specificity. In contrast to the effects seen in the dLS, intra-MS infusions of muscimol had no effect on theta frequency, whereas intra-MS infusions of GABAzine increased theta frequency. Given the hypothesized role of hippocampal theta in behavioral defense, we also examined the effects of intra-dLS application of muscimol in two models of anxiety, the elevated plus maze and the novelty-induced suppression of feeding paradigm; both tests revealed clear, anxiolytic-like effects following muscimol infusions. The fact that dLS-muscimol increased theta frequency while also reducing anxiety-like behaviors challenges the influential theta suppression model of anxiolysis, which predicts a slowing of theta with anxiolytic compounds. More importantly, the experiments reveal a novel role of the LS, especially its dorsal aspects, as an important gating mechanism for the expression of theta oscillations in the rodent hippocampus.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".