Rats with hippocampal damage are impaired on place learning in the water task when overtrained under constrained conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, numerous investigations have been conducted on the mammalian hippocampus to determine its precise function. This research has implicated a fundamental role for the hippocampus in the formation of a spatial map that an animal can use to appropriately guide behavior in complex relational tasks. Despite substantial evidence to support this view, there have been challenges to this theory of hippocampal function. One alternative view suggests that the hippocampus is involved with the integration and updating of voluntary movement. Therefore, any impairments expressed by rats with hippocampal damage are not due to the inability to form or use a spatial map, but rather arise because they are unable to accurately control and monitor on-line movement. Accordingly, investigators, supporting the latter, claim that animals with hippocampal lesions are able to solve a spatial version of the water task if they are given explicit training on how to get to the hidden platform. In the present study we trained rodents with or without hippocampal damage on a cue/place water task for 40 days. In using behaviorally constraining procedures and by overtraining these animals, we provided them with knowledge of how to get to the hidden platform, and ensured enough time to learn the task. Our findings revealed that although rats with hippocampal lesions showed some place responses, they were significantly impaired on all measures of place learning compared to sham animals under these intensive procedures. Overall, the results of the present study do not support the idea that the hippocampus is not specifically involved in acquisition of place information in the water task.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".