MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138284335 · doi:10.1101/2021.03.22.436536

Adult neurogenesis mediates forgetting of multiple types of memory in the rat

2021· preprint· en· W3138284335 on OpenAlexafffund
Gavin A. Scott, Dylan J. Terstege, Andrew J. Roebuck, Kelsea A. Gorzo, Alex P. Vu, John G. Howland, Jonathan R. Epp

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYukon UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary
KeywordsNeurogenesisForgettingHippocampal formationDentate gyrusPsychologyHippocampusNeuroscienceContext (archaeology)Cognitive psychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The formation and retention of hippocampus-dependent memories is impacted by neurogenesis, a process that involves the production of new neurons in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus. Recent studies demonstrate that increasing neurogenesis after memory formation induces forgetting of previously acquired memories. Neurogenesis-induced forgetting was originally demonstrated in mice, but a recent report suggests that the same effect may be absent in rats. Although a general species difference is possible, other potential explanations for these incongruent findings are that memories which are more strongly reinforced become resilient to forgetting or that perhaps only certain types of memories are affected. Here, we investigated whether neurogenesis-induced forgetting occurs in rats using several hippocampal dependent tasks including contextual fear conditioning (CFC), the Morris Water Task (MWT), and touchscreen paired associates learning (PAL). Neurogenesis was increased following training using voluntary exercise for 4 weeks before recall of the previous memory was assessed. We show that voluntary running causes forgetting of context fear memories in a neurogenesis-dependent manner, and that neurogenesis-induced forgetting is present in rats across behavioral tasks despite differences in complexity or reliance on spatial, context, or object memories. In addition, we asked whether stronger memories are less susceptible to forgetting by varying the strength of training. Even with a very strong training protocol in the CFC task, we still observed enhanced forgetting related to increased neurogenesis. These results suggest that forgetting due to neurogenesis is a conserved mechanism that aids in the clearance of memories. Significance Statement Recent evidence indicates that hippocampal neurogenesis mediates forgetting of older memories and enhances encoding of new memories free of proactive interference. This evidence comes from multiple rodent species, behavioral tasks, and methods of increasing neurogenesis. However, a recent paper by (Kodali et al. 2016) found that voluntary exercise-induced neurogenesis did not cause forgetting in the Morris Water Task in rats. The results call into question whether the phenomenon is a conserved function of neurogenesis across species. In the present study, we show that voluntary running causes robust forgetting in rats in a neurogenesis-dependent manner and that the effect is present across three different behavioral tasks, confirming the existence of the phenomenon in rats and adding to the growing evidence that forgetting is a conserved function of hippocampal neurogenesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207