Cited by 164Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

Distinct contributions of the hippocampus and medial prefrontal cortex to the “what–where–when” components of episodic-like memory in mice

Open access
DeVito, Loren M., Eichenbaum, Howard·2010·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

There is a current controversy regarding whether non-human animals have a capacity for episodic memory, defined by the ability to remember what happened and where and when it occurred. It is also unclear which brain structures support the "what," "where," and "when" aspects of episodic memory. Here we addressed these issues by testing episodic memory in mice, using an object recognition task that has previously been employed to assess the "what," "where," and "when" components of recognition memory. Whereas intact mice remembered which objects they had explored, as well as when and where they were experienced, mice with damage to the hippocampus were impaired on all three components of the task. In contrast, animals with medial prefrontal cortical lesions were selectively impaired on the "where" component of the task, but had intact memory for "what" and "when." These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the hippocampus integrates the "what," "where," and "when" features of unique experiences, whereas the prefrontal cortex makes a more selective contribution to retrieving source information about where events occurred.

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 · 10.1016/j.bbr.2009.09.014

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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DeVito, L. M., & Eichenbaum, H.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Eichenbaum, Howard
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-12
Volume
215
Issue
2
Pages
318-325
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2102411019
Cited by
164
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 12
FWCI
4.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH060450, R01MH059357)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
episodic-like memory, hippocampus, medial prefrontal cortex, object recognition memory, source memory, hippocampal lesions, prefrontal cortex lesions, mice, recognition memory
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Ibotenic Acid, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Microinjections, Mental Recall, N-Methylaspartate, Prefrontal Cortex, Mice

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