Absence of systems consolidation of fear memories after dorsal, ventral, or complete hippocampal damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the effects of dorsal, ventral, or complete damage to the hippocampus on long-term retention of a Pavlovian conditioned fear response to a tone and a context paired with foot shock. Rats received a fear conditioning episode, in which a tone and context or context-alone were paired with foot shock. Two days or 12 weeks later, they received sham, dorsal, ventral, or complete NMDA-induced damage of the hippocampus. During a retention test conducted 2 weeks after surgery, the sham control rats exhibited high levels of freezing in the context and in the presence of the tone. Rats with dorsal, ventral, or complete hippocampal damage displayed very little freezing in the context at either learning-surgery intervals. Partial hippocampal damage tended to cause a smaller but consistent deficit in conditioned responding to context at the shorter (2 day) learning-surgery interval. Rats with hippocampal damage did not display less severe retrograde amnesia for more remote (12 weeks) memories. A similar pattern of results was observed for freezing to the tone. We find that the severity of retrograde amnesia for fear conditioning is related to the extent of the damage and that there is consistent and severe retrograde amnesia for remote contextual and cued fear memories. These findings support the idea that the hippocampal formation plays an essential and possibly permanent role in fear memories.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".