MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311633659 · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2022.1007748

Infusing zeta inhibitory peptide into the perirhinal cortex of rats abolishes long-term object recognition memory without affecting novel object location recognition

2022· article· en· W4311633659 on OpenAlexafffund
Keanan Augereau, Paola V. Migues, Oliver Hardt

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerirhinal cortexCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionRecognition memoryHippocampusObject (grammar)NeurosciencePsychologyTemporal lobeCortex (anatomy)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceCognitive psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infusing the amnesic agent zeta inhibitory peptide (ZIP) into the dorsal hippocampus disrupts established long-term object location recognition memory without affecting object identity recognition, which likely depends on the perirhinal cortex. Here, we tested whether infusing ZIP into the perirhinal cortex can abolish long-term memory supporting object identity recognition, leaving long-term object location recognition memory intact. We infused ZIP into the perirhinal cortex of rats either 1 day or 6 days after exposing them to two identical objects in an open field arena. One day after ZIP infusion, that is, 2 or 7 days after object exposure, we either assessed whether the animals recognized that now one of the two objects was novel or whether they recognized that one of the two familiar objects was at a new location. Our results show for both retention intervals, infusions of ZIP into the perirhinal cortex impaired novel object recognition but spared novel object location recognition. Rats that received a scrambled version of ZIP had no deficit in either test at both retention intervals and expressed stronger novel object recognition compared to rats infused with ZIP. These findings support the view that object recognition depends on dissociable memory representations distributed across different brain areas, with perirhinal cortex maintaining long-term memory for what objects had been encountered, and hippocampus supporting memory for where these objects had been placed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Behavioral NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207