Remote spatial memory processing in the juvenile brain and contribution of the hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A majority of research into memory formation and consolidation is commonly focused on adult brains and organisms. Our work focuses on the mechanisms of memory within the developing, juvenile brain in an attempt to provide a more full understanding of the underlying neural mechanisms of memory formation, consolidation and storage. During juvenile development, the brain undergoes important remodeling and synaptic pruning towards shaping the adult brain. Thus, during this time, memories may be lost through the remodeling of hippocampal-neocortical connections. The significance of comparing juvenile and adult memory processes is critical in understanding the structural changes that occur within memory-specific circuits associated with long-term memory formation. To provide a comparison of the neurobehavioral aspects of long-term memory formation in juveniles and adults, we trained Long Evan’s rats on a spatial task on postnatal days 16, 18, 20, 25, 30 or 50 (adults). Each age group was then tested for memory recall 24 hours or 3 weeks later. We noted that memory recall showed a dramatic change at postnatal day 20 such that memory recall at postnatal day 25 was similar to adult levels. We then used immunohistochemistry to quantify and analyze neural activity patterns in brain regions thought to underlie the short- and long-term storage of spatial memories. Identification of these regional activity changes during juvenile periods and comparison with adults allows us to explore the function and organization of interacting brain regions in long-term spatial memory storage during development.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".