Cited by 288Memory and Neural MechanismsNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Sublayer-Specific Coding Dynamics during Spatial Navigation and Learning in Hippocampal Area CA1

Open access
Danielson, Nathan B., Zaremba, Jeffrey D., Kaifosh, Patrick, Bowler, John, Ladow, Max, Losonczy, Attila·2016·Neuron

Abstract

The mammalian hippocampus is critical for spatial information processing and episodic memory. Its primary output cells, CA1 pyramidal cells (CA1 PCs), vary in genetics, morphology, connectivity, and electrophysiological properties. It is therefore possible that distinct CA1 PC subpopulations encode different features of the environment and differentially contribute to learning. To test this hypothesis, we optically monitored activity in deep and superficial CA1 PCs segregated along the radial axis of the mouse hippocampus and assessed the relationship between sublayer dynamics and learning. Superficial place maps were more stable than deep during head-fixed exploration. Deep maps, however, were preferentially stabilized during goal-oriented learning, and representation of the reward zone by deep cells predicted task performance. These findings demonstrate that superficial CA1 PCs provide a more stable map of an environment, while their counterparts in the deep sublayer provide a more flexible representation that is shaped by learning about salient features in the environment. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

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.neuron.2016.06.020

Cites

94 of 94 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?

  • Place fields uniformly tiled the available space, with a slight over-representation of the reward's position and of prominent tactile cues on the belt.

    “Place fields uniformly tiled the available space (Fig. 1c), with a slight over-representation of the reward’s position and of prominent tactile cues on the belt (see also refs. 39–41).”

    From Place and behavioral modulation of hippocampal neurons during immobility (2026) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Results section, “Deep CA1 PCs predict performance on the goal-oriented learning task” (page unavailable), reports reward-zone over-representation, supporting the reward part of the cited clause. The “Contexts” section describes tactile cues on the belt, but the paper does not report over-representation of place fields at those cues. Its reference to a nearly uniform distribution concerns shifts in field centroids during remapping, not uniform tiling of the available space. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Running along the treadmill reliably engaged the hippocampal place representation, with 340 out of 520 putative principal neurons classified as place cells.

    “Consistent with previous work37–39, running along the treadmill reliably engaged the hippocampal place representation, with the large majority of putative principal neurons (340 out of 520) being classified as place cells (see Methods).”

    From Place and behavioral modulation of hippocampal neurons during immobility (2026) · cites this paper as [39]

    In Results, under “Deep CA1 PCs are a highly active place coding population” (page unavailable), the paper reports identifying place cells among CA1 principal cells; another Results section describes mice running on a treadmill. Our copy does not report 340 of 520 neurons as place cells, so it supports the general treadmill place-coding point but not the attributed count. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Danielson, N. B., Zaremba, J. D., Kaifosh, P., Bowler, J., Ladow, M., & Losonczy, A.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Danielson, Nathan B.
  • Losonczy, Attila
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
91
Issue
3
Pages
652-665
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2465397039
Cited by
288
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 5
FWCI
18.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (F31MH105169, R01MH100631)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U01NS090583, R01NS094668, F30NS090819)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
hippocampal CA1, pyramidal neurons, spatial navigation, goal-directed learning, mouse hippocampus, episodic memory
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Female, Learning, Male, Reward, Pyramidal Cells, Mice, CA1 Region, Hippocampal, Spatial Navigation

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