Effects of hippocampal cholinergic deafferentation on learning strategy selection in a visible platform version of the water maze
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent evidence has suggested that the relative levels of acetylcholine (ACh) between brain structures may be an important factor in the choice of behavioral strategy in settings in which either hippocampal or dorsal striatal brain systems can be employed both effectively and independently (McIntyre and Gold. 1999. Soc Neurosci Abs 25:1388). The current investigation used the neurotoxin 192 IgG-saporin to deplete the hippocampus of ACh selectively, while leaving ACh in other brain regions, including dorsal striatum, intact. Rats were then trained on a version of the Morris water maze, in which behavioral strategies attributed to the hippocampus and dorsal striatum are placed in direct competition. It was predicted that rats with hippocampal ACh depletion would display a cue bias. Contrary to this prediction, depleting hippocampal ACh did not bias against and, in fact, promoted use of a hippocampal place strategy in this task, as indicated by choice in competition tests and performance on hidden platform training trials. These data add to a growing literature demonstrating that the septohippocampal cholinergic system is not required for accurate spatial learning and suggest a complex role for basal forebrain projections in processing information about the spatial environment.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".