MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130303756 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs121

Inhibitory Control Deficits in Rats with Ventral Hippocampal Lesions

2012· article· en· W2130303756 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew R. Abela, S. D. Dougherty, E. D. Fagen, C. J. R. Hill, Yogita Chudasama

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampusInhibitory postsynaptic potentialHippocampal formationSerotonin reuptake inhibitorPsychologyLesionDopamineNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineAnesthesiaPathologyAntidepressant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two experiments are reported in which rats with selective hippocampal lesions were tested on 2 prefrontal-dependent tasks. In Experiment 1, we compared the effects of lesions of the ventral hippocampus (vHC), dorsal hippocampus (dHC), and sham control surgery on the 5-choice reaction time task. Whereas rats with lesions of the dHC were indistinguishable from sham controls, those with vHC lesions showed increased premature responses and reduced accuracy throughout the experiment. The subsequent administration of systemic escitalopram (5 mg/kg), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, reduced the number of premature responses in the vHC animals to control levels. In contrast, systemic injections of GBR 12909, a dopamine reuptake inhibitor, failed to ameliorate the impulsive deficit in the vHC group and, in addition, elevated perseverative responding in the vHC group only. In Experiment 2, we tested a separate group of rats with vHC lesions on a touchscreen visual discrimination and reversal learning task. Rats with vHC lesions acquired the visual discrimination as well as sham controls and showed normal inhibitory control of a previously reinforced response during reversal learning. These data support a role for the vHC in inhibitory control functions, especially in the inhibitory control of impulsive actions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations96
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207