Cited by 18Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

Contrasting roles for DNA methyltransferases and histone deacetylases in single-item and associative recognition memory

Open access
Scott, Hannah, Smith, Anna E., Barker, Gareth R., Uney, James B., Warburton, E. Clea·2017·Neuroepigenetics

Abstract

Recognition memory enables us to judge whether we have encountered a stimulus before and to recall associated information, including where the stimulus was encountered. The perirhinal cortex (PRh) is required for judgment of stimulus familiarity, while hippocampus (HPC) and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) are additionally involved when spatial information associated with a stimulus needs to be remembered. While gene expression is known to be essential for the consolidation of long-term recognition memory, the underlying regulatory mechanisms are not fully understood. Here we investigated the roles of two epigenetic mechanisms, DNA methylation and histone deacetylation, in recognition memory. Infusion of DNA methyltransferase inhibitors into PRh impaired performance in novel object recognition and object-in-place tasks while infusions into HPC or mPFC impaired object-in-place performance only. In contrast, inhibition of histone deacetylases in PRh, but not mPFC, enhanced recognition memory. These results support the emerging role of epigenetic processes in learning and memory.

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.nepig.2017.02.001

Cites

73 of 73 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

Authors
Scott, H., Smith, A. E., Barker, G. R., Uney, J. B., & Warburton, E. C.
Affiliations
University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Scott, Hannah
Venue
Neuroepigenetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
9
Pages
1-9
ISSN
2214-7845 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2592498240
Cited by
18
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroepigenetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I00310X/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
Keywords
recognition memory, hypomethylating agents, histone deacetylase inhibitors, DNA methylation, histone deacetylation, perirhinal cortex, hippocampus, medial prefrontal cortex, novel object recognition, spatial memory, memory consolidation

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