Cited by 42Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Processing of spatial and non-spatial information in rats with lesions of the medial and lateral entorhinal cortex: environmental complexity matters

Rodo, Christophe, Sargolini, Francesca, Save, Etienne·2017·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

The entorhinal-hippocampal circuitry has been suggested to play an important role in episodic memory but the contribution of the entorhinal cortex remains elusive. Predominant theories propose that the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) processes spatial information whereas the lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC) processes non spatial information. A recent study using an object exploration task has suggested that the involvement of the MEC and LEC spatial and non-spatial information processing could be modulated by the amount of information to be processed, i.e. environmental complexity. To address this hypothesis we used an object exploration task in which rats with excitotoxic lesions of the MEC and LEC had to detect spatial and non-spatial novelty among a set of objects and we varied environmental complexity by decreasing the number of objects or amount of object diversity. Reducing diversity resulted in restored ability to process spatial and non-spatial information in MEC and LEC groups, respectively. Reducing the number of objects yielded restored ability to process non-spatial information in the LEC group but not the ability to process spatial information in the MEC group. The findings indicate that the MEC and LEC are not strictly necessary for spatial and non-spatial processing but that their involvement depends on the complexity of the information to be processed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bbr.2016.12.009

Cites

47 of 47 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
Rodo, C., Sargolini, F., & Save, E.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
320
Pages
200-209
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2560576377
Cited by
42
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5
FWCI
2.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
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
medial entorhinal cortex, lateral entorhinal cortex, spatial data processing, environmental complexity, object exploration, novelty detection, excitotoxic lesions, episodic memory, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Environment, Exploratory Behavior, Hippocampus, Locomotion, Male, Neural Pathways, Spatial Behavior, Time Factors, Statistics, Nonparametric, Entorhinal Cortex, 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