Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 399

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spatial information content and reliability of hippocampal CA1 neurons: Effects of visual input

Markus, Etan J., Barnes, Carol A., McNaughton, Bruce L., Gladden, Victoria L., Skaggs, William E.·1994·Hippocampus

Abstract

The effects of darkness on quantitative spatial firing characteristics of 235 hippocampal CA1 “complex spike” (CS) cells were studied in young and old Fischer‐344 rats during food‐motivated performance of a randomized, forced‐choice task on an eight‐arm radial maze. The room lights were turned on or off on alternate blocks of all eight arms. In the dark, a lower proportion of CS cells had “place fields,” and the fields were less specific and less reliable than in the light. A small number of cells had place fields unique to the dark condition. Like CS cells, Theta cells showed a reduction in spatially related firing in the dark. The specificity and reliability of the place fields under both light and dark conditions were similar for both age groups. Increasing the salience of the environment, by increasing the light level and the number of visual cues in the light condition, did not affect the specificity or reliability of the place fields. Even though all rats had substantial prior experience with the environment, and were placed on the maze center under normal illumination before the first dark trial, the correlation between the firing pattern in the light and dark increased after the rat first traversed the maze in the light. Thus, even after considerable experience with the environment over days, experiencing the illuminated environment from different locations on a given day was a significant factor affecting subsequent location and reliability of place fields in darkness. While the task was simple and errors rare, rats that made fewer errors (i.e., re‐entries into the previously visited arm) also had more reliable place cells, but no such correlation was found with place cell specificity. Thus, the reliability of spatial firing in the hippocampus may be more important for spatial navigation than the size of the place fields per se. Alternatively, both spatial memory and place field reliability may be modulated by a common variable, such as attention. © 1994 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

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.450040404

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 399

Metadata

Authors
Markus, E. J., Barnes, C. A., McNaughton, B. L., Gladden, V. L., & Skaggs, W. E.
Venue
Hippocampus
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-08
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
410-421
ISSN
  • 1050-9631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-1063
OpenAlex
W2016332821
Cited by
399
References
4
FWCI
4.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Spatial information content and reliability of hippocampal CA1 neurons: Effects of visual input. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hipo.450040404
The paper
Markus, E. J., Barnes, C. A., McNaughton, B. L., Gladden, V. L., & Skaggs, W. E. (1994). Spatial information content and reliability of hippocampal CA1 neurons: Effects of visual input. Hippocampus. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.450040404

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.