Cited by 58Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Neurotoxic lesions of the medial prefrontal cortex or medial striatum impair multiple-location place learning in the water task: evidence for neural structures with complementary roles in behavioural flexibility

McDonald, Robert J., King, Amy L., Foong, Natalie, Rizos, Zoe, Hong, Nancy S.·2008·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

This series of experiments assessed the effects of neurotoxic damage to either the medial prefrontal cortex or the medial striatum on the acquisition of multiple-location place learning in the water task. During training, normal subjects learn to search for a new hidden platform location at the beginning of each training session and to continue to swim to that location until the end of training during that session. By the end of training, normal subjects show one-trail place learning in which they find the new location on the first trial and swim directly to that location on the second swim. Rats with damage to either the medial prefrontal cortex or dorso-medial striatum showed deficits in learning to swim to the new location each day. These deficits were interpreted as impairments in behavioural flexibility. The lesion-induced impairment was not caused by perseverative errors but was manifested in an inability to rapidly acquire a new spatial position in conflict with the previous position. Interestingly, the subjects from both lesion groups were able to show normal place learning and memory after repeated training within a session. The results were interpreted as suggestive of a complementary role of these neural structures in behavioural flexibility.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-008-1314-z

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDonald, R. J., King, A. L., Foong, N., Rizos, Z., & Hong, N. S.
Affiliations
University of Lethbridge (CA)
Corresponding author
McDonald, Robert J.
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2008-03-11
Volume
187
Issue
3
Pages
419-427
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W1980952692
Cited by
58
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
medial prefrontal cortex, medial striatum, behavioral flexibility, place learning, water maze, spatial learning, neurotoxic lesion, perseveration, spatial memory, rats
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Brain Injuries, Corpus Striatum, Learning Disabilities, Neurotoxins, Reaction Time, Reversal Learning, Spatial Behavior, N-Methylaspartate, Quinolinic Acid, Prefrontal Cortex, Maze Learning, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats

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