Cited by 72Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Place field repetition and spatial learning in a multicompartment environment

Open access
Grieves, Roddy M., Jenkins, Bryan W., Harland, Bruce C., Wood, Emma R., Dudchenko, Paul A.·2016·Hippocampus

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that place cells in the hippocampus possess firing fields that repeat in physically similar, parallel environments. These results imply that it should be difficult for animals to distinguish parallel environments at a behavioral level. To test this, we trained rats on a novel odor-location task in an environment with four parallel compartments which had previously been shown to yield place field repetition. A second group of animals was trained on the same task, but with the compartments arranged in different directions, an arrangement we hypothesised would yield less place field repetition. Learning of the odor-location task in the parallel compartments was significantly impaired relative to learning in the radially arranged compartments. Fewer animals acquired the full discrimination in the parallel compartments compared to those trained in the radial compartments, and the former also required many more sessions to reach criterion compared to the latter. To confirm that the arrangement of compartments yielded differences in place cell repetition, in a separate group of animals we recorded from CA1 place cells in both environments. We found that CA1 place cells exhibited repeated fields across four parallel local compartments, but did not do so when the same compartments were arranged radially. To confirm that the differences in place field repetition across the parallel and radial compartments depended on their angular arrangement, and not incidental differences in access to an extra-maze visual landmark, we repeated the recordings in a second set of rats in the absence of the orientation landmark. We found, once again, that place fields showed repetition in parallel compartments, and did not do so in radially arranged compartments. Thus place field repetition, or lack thereof, in these compartments was not dependent on extra-maze cues. Together, these results imply that place field repetition constrains spatial learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hipo.22496

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • It is not yet entirely conclusive that all goldfish neurons with border activity are functionally closer to BVCs than PCs, because some PCs can also exhibit PF duplications in parallel compartments.

    “Second, it is not yet entirely conclusive that all goldfish neurons with border activity are functionally closer to BVCs than PCs, because some PCs can also exhibit PF duplications in parallel compartments48–50.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hartley T, Burgess N, Lever C, Cacucci F, O'Keefe J. 2000 Modeling place fields in terms of the cortical inputs to the hippocampus. Hippocampus 10: 369– 379. 10985276
  2. Tanila H. 1999 Hippocampal place cells can develop distinct representations of two visually identical environments. Hippocampus 9: 235– 246. 10401639

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grieves, R. M., Jenkins, B. W., Harland, B. C., Wood, E. R., & Dudchenko, P. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Stirling (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Wood, Emma R.
  • Dudchenko, Paul A.
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-08-11
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
118-134
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
OpenAlex
W1484141182
Cited by
72
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6
FWCI
4.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hippocampus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Human Frontiers Science Programme (RGP0039/2010)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/L000040/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
place cells, spatial learning, CA1, rats
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Discrimination, Psychological, Electrodes, Implanted, Environment, Male, Neurons, Neuropsychological Tests, Odorants, Physical Stimulation, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Cohort Studies, Rats, Olfactory Perception, CA1 Region, Hippocampal, Spatial Learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review