CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesSpatial Cognition and Navigation

The Parahippocampal Cortex and its Functional Connection with the Hippocampus are Critical for Nonnavigational Spatial Memory in Macaques

Open access
LaFlamme, Elyssa M, Waguespack, Hannah F, Forcelli, Patrick A, Malkova, Ludise·2021·Cerebral Cortex
DOI 10.1093/cercor/bhaa358PMC PMC7945022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Hamilton Search Task (HST) is a test of nonnavigational spatial memory that is dependent on the hippocampus. The parahippocampal cortex (PHC) is a major route for spatial information to reach the hippocampus, but the extent to which the PHC and hippocampus function independently of one another in the context of nonnavigational spatial memory is unclear. Here, we tested the hypotheses that (1) bilateral pharmacological inactivation of the PHC would impair HST performance, and (2) that functional disconnection of the PHC and hippocampus by contralateral (crossed) inactivation would likewise impair performance. Transient inactivation of the PHC impaired HST performance most robustly with 30 s intertrial delays, but not when color cues were introduced. Functional disconnection of the PHC and hippocampus, but not separate unilateral inactivation of either region, also selectively impaired long-term spatial memory. These findings indicate a critical role for the PHC and its interactions with the hippocampus in nonnavigational spatial 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 · 10.1093/cercor/bhaa358

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • The parahippocampal gyrus (BM36) covers the entorhinal, perirhinal, and parahippocampal cortices in the medial temporal lobe of the brain, playing critical roles in memory encoding and retrieval, as well as spatial navigation.

    “The parahippocampal gyrus (BM36) covers the entorhinal, perirhinal, and parahippocampal cortices in the medial temporal lobe of the brain, playing critical roles in memory encoding and retrieval (61), as well as spatial navigation (62, 63).”

    From Comprehensive characterization of the transcriptional landscape in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) brains (2025) · cites this paper as [63]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) links the parahippocampal cortex to retrieval of spatial information and says it is necessary, with the hippocampus, for complex spatial maps. The Introduction (page unavailable) defines that cortex as areas TH and TF, but the paper does not identify BM36 or say that the parahippocampal gyrus encompasses the entorhinal and perirhinal cortices. Its evidence for memory encoding is also narrower than the general claim. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 99

  1. Agster KL, Fortin NJ, Eichenbaum H. 2002. The hippocampus and disambiguation of overlapping sequences. J Neurosci. 22:5760–5768. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aguilar BL, Forcelli PA, Malkova L. 2018. Inhibition of the substantia nigra pars reticulata produces divergent effects on sensorimotor gating in rats and monkeys. Sci Rep. 8:9369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aguirre GK, D’Esposito M. 1999. Topographical disorientation: a synthesis and taxonomy. Brain. 122:1613–1628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alvarado MC, Bachevalier J. 2005a. Comparison of the effects of damage to the perirhinal and parahippocampal cortex on transverse patterning and location memory in rhesus macaques. J Neurosci. 25:1599–1609. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Alvarado MC, Bachevalier J. 2005b. Selective neurotoxic damage to the hippocampal formation impairs performance of the transverse patterning and location memory tasks in rhesus macaques. Hippocampus. 15:118–131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Anderson RA, Asanuma C, Essick G, Siegel RM. 1990. Corticocortical connections of anatomically and physiologically defined subdivisions within the inferior parietal lobule. J Comp Neurol. 296:65–113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bachevalier J, Nemanic S. 2008. Memory for spatial location and object-place associations are differently processed by the hippocampal formation, parahippocampal areas TH/TF, and perirhinal cortex. Hippocampus. 18:64–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bachevalier J, Nemanic S, Alvarado MC. 2015. The influence of context on recognition memory in monkeys: effects of hippocampal, parahippocampal and perirhinal lesions. Behav Brain Res. 285:89–98. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bachevalier J, Wright AA, Katz JS. 2013. Serial position functions following selective hippocampal lesions in monkeys: effects of delays and interference. Behav Processes. 93:155–166. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Banta Lavenex P, Amaral D, Lavenex P. 2006. Hippocampal lesion prevents spatial relational learning in adult macaque monkeys. J Neurosci. 26:4546–4558. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Banta Lavenex P, Lavenex P. 2009. Spatial memory and the monkey hippocampus: not all space is created equal. Hippocampus. 19:8–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Basile BM, Hampton RR. 2019. Nonnavigational spatial memory performance is unaffected by hippocampal damage in monkeys. Hippocampus. 29:93–101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Beason-Held LL, Rosene DL, Killany RJ, Moss MB. 1999. Hippocampal formation lesions produce memory impairment in the rhesus monkey. Hippocampus. 9:562–574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Belcher AM, Harrington RA, Malkova L, Mishkin M. 2006. Effects of hippocampal lesions on the monkey’s ability to learn large sets of object-place associations. Hippocampus. 16:361–367. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Blatt GJ, Pandya DN, Rosene DL. 2003. Parcellation of cortical afferents to three distinct sectors in the parahippocampal region in the monkey (Macaca fascicularis). Eur J Neurosci. 22:1368–1388. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bohbot VD, Allen JJB, Dagher A, Dumoulin SO, Evans AC, Petrides M, Kalina M, Stepankova K, Nadel L. 2015. Role of the parahippocampal cortex in memory for the configuration but not the identity of objects: converging evidence from patients with selective thermal lesions and fMRI. Front Hum Neurosci. 9:431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Bohbot V, Corkin S. 2007. Posterior parahippocampal place learning in H.M. Hippocampus. 17:863–872. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Bohbot VD, Iaria G, Petrides M. 2004. Hippocampal function and spatial memory: evidence from functional neuroimaging in healthy participants and performance of patients with medial temporal lobe resections. Neuropsychology. 18:418–425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Brewer JB, Zhao Z, Desmond JE, Glover GH, Gabrieli JD. 1998. Making memories: brain activity that predicts how well visual experience will be remembered. Science. 281:1185–1187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Brophy LM, Jackson M, Crowe SF. 2009. Interference effects on commonly used memory tasks. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 24:105–112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Brown TI, Ross RS, Keller JB, Hasselmo ME, Stern CE. 2010. Which way was I going? Contextual retrieval supports the disambiguation of well learned overlapping navigational routes. J Neurosci. 30:7414–7422. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Brown TI, Stern CE. 2014. Contributions of medial temporal lobe and striatal memory systems to learning and retrieving overlapping spatial memories. Cereb Cortex. 24:1906–1922. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Browning PGF, Gaffan D. 2008. Global retrograde amnesia but selective anterograde amnesia after frontal-temporal disconnection in monkeys. Neuropsychologia. 46:2494–2502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Burgess N, Maguire EA, Spiers HJ, O’Keefe J. 2001. A temporoparietal and prefrontal network for retrieving the spatial context of lifelike events. NeuroImage. 14:439–453. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Burke SN, Gaynor LS, Barnes CA, Bauer RM, Bizon JL, Roberson ED, Ryan L. 2018. Shared functions of perirhinal and parahippocampal cortices: implications for cognitive aging. Cell Press Rev. 41:349–359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Bussey TJ, Wise SP, Murray EA. 2002. Interaction of ventral and orbital prefrontal cortex with inferotemporal cortex in conditional visuomotor learning. Behav Neurosci. 116:703–715. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Cavada C, Goldman-Rakic PS. 1989. Posterior parietal cortex in rhesus monkey: I. Parcellations of areas based on distinctive limbic and sensory corticocortical connections. J Comp Neurol. 287:393–421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Charles DP, Gaffan D, Buckley MJ. 2004. Impaired recency judgments and intact novelty judgments after fornix transection in monkeys. J Neurosci. 24:2037–2044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Ding SL, Van Hoesen G, Rockland KS. 2000. Inferior parietal lobule projections to the presubiculum and neighboring ventromedial temporal cortical areas. J Comp Neurol. 425:510–530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Dudukovic NM, Wagner AD. 2007. Goal-dependent modulation of declarative memory: neural correlates of temporal recency decisions and novelty detection. Neuropsychologia. 45:2608–2620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Eichenbaum H, Lipton P. 2008. Towards a functional organization of the medial temporal lobe memory system: role of the parahippocampal and medial entorhinal cortical areas. Hippocampus. 18:1314–1324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Elorette C, Aguilar BL, Novak V, Forcelli PA, Malkova L. 2020. Dysregulation of behavioral and autonomic responses to emotional and social stimuli following bidirectional pharmacological manipulation of the basolateral amygdala in macaques. Neuropharmacology. 179:108275. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Epstein RA, Harris A, Stanley D, Kanwisher N. 1999. The parahippocampal place area: recognition, navigation, or encoding? Neuron. 23:115–125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Epstein RA, Higgins JS. 2006. Parahippocampal and retrosplenial involvement in two kinds of scene recognition. J Vis. 6:803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Epstein RA, Kanwisher N. 1998. A cortical representation of the local visual environment. Nature. 392:1149–1152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Ettlinger G. 1959. Visual discrimination following successive temporal ablations in monkeys. Brain. 82:232–250. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Forcelli PA, Palchik G, Leath T, DesJardin JT, Gale K, Malkova L. 2014. Memory loss in a nonnavigational spatial task after hippocampal inactivation in monkeys. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 111:4315–4320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Froudist-Walsh S, Browning PGF, Croxson PL, Murphy KL, Shamy JL, Veuthey TL, Wilson CRE, Baxter MG. 2018. The rhesus monkey hippocampus critically contributes to scene memory retrieval, but not new learning. J Neurosci. 38:7800–7808. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Gaffan D, Parker A. 1996. Interaction of perirhinal cortex with the fornix-fimbria: memory for objects and “object-in-place” memory. J Neurosci. 16:5864–5869. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Glavis-Bloom C, Alvarado MC, Bachevalier J. 2013. Neonatal hippocampal damage impairs specific food/place associations in adult macaques. Behav Neurosci. 127:9–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Hampton RR, Hampstead BM, Murray EA. 2004. Selective hippocampal damage in rhesus monkeys impairs spatial memory in an open field test. Hippocampus. 14:808–818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Hayes SM, Ryan L, Schnyer DM, Nadel L. 2004. An fMRI study of episodic memory: retrieval of object, spatial, and temporal information. Behav Neurosci. 118:885–896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Howard LR, Kumaran D, Ólafsdóttir HF, Spiers HJ. 2011. Double dissociation between hippocampal and parahippocampal response to object-background context and scene novelty. J Neurosci. 31:5253–5261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Iaria G, Petrides M, Dagher A, Pike B, Bohbot VD. 2003. Cognitive strategies dependent on the hippocampus and caudate nucleus in human navigation: variability and change with practice. J Neurosci. 23:5945–5952. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Insausti R, Amaral DG, Cowan WM. 1987. The entorhinal cortex of the monkey. II. Cortical afferents. J Comp Neurol. 264:356–395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Jones EG, Powell TPS. 1970. An anatomical study of converging sensory pathways within the cerebral cortex of the monkey. Brain. 93:783–820. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Konishi K, Etchamendy N, Roy S, Marighetto A, Rajah N, Bohbot VD. 2013. Decreased functional magnetic resonance imaging activity in the hippocampus in favor of the caudate nucleus in older adults tested in a virtual navigation task. Hippocampus. 23:1005–1014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Kosel KC, Van Hoesen GW, Rosene DL. 1982. Non-hippocampal cortical projections from the entorhinal cortex in the rat and rhesus monkey. Brain Res. 244:201–213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Kumaran D, Maguire EA. 2006. The dynamics of hippocampal activation during encoding of overlapping sequences. Neuron. 49:617–629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lavenex P, Amaral DG. 2000. Hippocampal-neocortical interaction: a hierarchy of associativity. J Neurosci. 10:420–430. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Lavenex P, Suzuki WA, Amaral DG. 2002. Perirhinal and parahippocampal cortices of the macaque monkey: projections to the neocortex. J Comp Neurol. 447:394–420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Levin ED, Bowman RE. 1986a. Long-term lead effects on the Hamilton Search Task and delayed alternation in monkeys. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 8:219–224. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Levin ED, Bowman RE. 1986b. Scopolamine effects on Hamilton Search Task performance in monkeys. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 24:819–821. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Maguire EA, Frith CD, Burgess N, Donnett JG, O’Keefe J. 1998. Knowing where things are parahippocampal involvement in encoding object locations in virtual large-scale space. J Cogn Neurosci. 10:61–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Mahut H, Cordeau JP. 1963. Spatial reversal deficit in monkeys with amygdalo-hippocampal ablations. Exp Neurol. 7:426–434. [Google Scholar]
  56. Malkova L, Forcelli PA, Wellman LL, Dybdal D, Dubach MF, Gale K. 2015. Blockade of glutamatergic transmission in perirhinal cortex impairs object recognition memory in macaques. J Neurosci. 35:5043–5050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Malkova L, Mishkin M. 2003. One-trial memory for object-place associations after separate lesions of hippocampus and posterior parahippocampal region in monkey. J Neurosci. 23:1956–1965. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Malkova L, Saunders RC, LaFlamme EM, Forcelli PA. 2017. Hippocampal lesions impair learning and performance on a non-navigational spatial task in monkeys [Conference presentation]. Bilbao (Spain): European Brain and Behavior Society Meeting. [Google Scholar]
  59. Martin-Elkins CL, Horel JA. 1992. Cortical afferents to behaviorally defined regions of the inferior temporal and parahippocampal gyri as demonstrated by WGA-HRP. J Comp Neurol. 321:177–192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Mishkin M, Ungerleider LG. 1982. Contribution of striate inputs to the visuospatial functions of the parieto-preoccipital cortex in monkeys. Behav Brain Res. 6:57–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Morris R, Petrides M, Pandya DN. 1999. Architecture and connections of retrosplenial area 30 in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Eur J Neurosci. 9:62–675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Murray EA, Baxter MG, Gaffan D. 1998. Monkeys with rhinal cortex damage or neurotoxic hippocampal lesions are impaired on spatial scene learning and object reversals. Behav Neurosci. 112:1291–1303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Murray EA, Wise SP. 2010. What, if anything, can monkeys tell us about human amnesia when they can’t say anything at all? Neuropsychologia. 48:2385–2405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Nemanic S, Alvarado MC, Bachevalier J. 2004. The hippocampal/parahippocampal regions and recognition memory: insights from visual paired comparison versus object-delayed nonmatching in monkeys. J Neurosci. 24:2013–2026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Orbach J, Milner B, Rasmussen T. 1960. Learning and retention in monkeys after amygdala-hippocampus resection. AMA Arch Neurol. 3:230–251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Pandya DN, Van Hoesen GW, Mesulam MM. 1981. Efferent connections of the cingulate gyrus in the rhesus monkey. Exp Brain Res. 42:319–330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Parker A, Gaffan D. 1998. Interaction of frontal and perirhinal cortices in visual object recognition memory in monkeys. Eur J Neurosci. 10:3044–3057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Parslow DM, Rose D, Brooks B, Fleminger S, Gray JA, Giampietro V, Brammer MJ, Williams S, Andrew C, Vythelingum GN et al. 2004. Allocentric spatial memory activation of the hippocampal formation measured with fMRI. Neuropsychol. 18:450–461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Peinado-Manzano MA. 1994. Amygdala, hippocampus and associative memory in rats. Behav Brain Res. 61:175–190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Pribram KW, Wilson W, Connors J. 1962. Effects of lesions of medial forebrain on alternation behavior of rhesus monkeys. Exp Neurol. 6:36–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Rosene DL, Van Hoesen GW. 1977. Hippocampal efferents reach widespread areas of cerebral cortex and amygdala in the rhesus monkey. Science. 198:315–317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Sakon JJ, Naya Y, Wirth S, Suzuki WA. 2014. Context-dependent incremental timing cells in the primate hippocampus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 111:18351–18356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Selemon LS, Goldman-Rakic PS. 1988. Common cortical and subcortical targets of the dorsolateral prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices in the rhesus monkey: evidence for a distributed neural network subserving spatially guided behavior. J Neurosci. 8:4049–4068. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Seltzer B, Pandya DN. 1976. Some cortical projections to the parahippocampal area in the rhesus monkey. Exp Neurol. 50:146–160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Seltzer B, Pandya DN. 1984. Further observations on parieto-temporal connections in the rhesus monkey. Exp Brain Res. 55:301–312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Spiers HJ, Burgess N, Hartley T, Vargha-Khadem F, O’Keefe J. 2001a. Bilateral hippocampal pathology impairs topographical and episodic memory but not visual pattern matching. Hippocampus. 11:715–725. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Spiers HJ, Burgess N, Maguire EA, Baxendale SA, Hartley T, Thompson PJ, O’Keefe J. 2001b. Unilateral temporal lobectomy patients show lateralized topographical and episodic memory deficits in a virtual town. Brain. 124:2476–2489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Stepien LS, Cordeau JP, Rasmussen T. 1960. Effect of temporal lobe and hippocampal lesions on auditory and visual memory in monkeys. Brain. 83:470–489. [Google Scholar]
  79. Suzuki WA, Amaral DG. 1990. Cortical inputs to the CA1 field of the monkey hippocampus originate from the perirhinal and parahippocampal cortex but not from area TE. Neurosci Lett. 115:43–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Suzuki WA, Amaral DG. 1994a. Perirhinal and parahippocampal cortices of the macaque monkey: cortical afferents. J Comp Neurol. 350:497–533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Suzuki WA, Amaral DG. 1994b. Topographic organization of the reciprocal connections between monkey entorhinal cortex and the perirhinal and parahippocampal cortices. J Neurosci. 14:1856–1877. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Tranel D, Brady DR, Van Hoesen GW, Damasio AR. 1988. Parahippocampal projections to posterior auditory association cortex (area Tpt) in Old-World monkeys. Exp Brain Res. 70:406–416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Ungerleider L, Mishkin M. 1982. Two cortical visual systems. In: Ingle D, Goodale M, Mansfield R, editors. Analysis of Visual Behavior. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, pp. 549–586. [Google Scholar]
  84. Van Hoesen GW. 1980. The cortico-cortical projections of the posterior parahippocampal area in the rhesus monkey. Anat Rec. 196:195A. [Google Scholar]
  85. Van Hoesen GW, Pandya DN, Butters N. 1972. Cortical afferents to the entorhinal cortex of the rhesus monkey. Science. 175:1471–1473. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Vogt BA, Finch DM, Olson CR. 1992. Functional heterogeneity in cingulate cortex: the anterior executive and posterior evaluative regions. Cereb Cortex. 2:435–443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Vogt BA, Pandya DN. 1987. Cingulate cortex of the rhesus monkey: II. Cortical afferents. J Comp Neurol. 262:271–289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Von Bonin G, Baily P. 1947. The neocortex of Macaca mulatta. Urbana (IL): University of Urbana Press. [Google Scholar]
  89. Vorhees CV, Williams MT. 2014. Assessing spatial learning and memory in rodents. ILAR J. 55:310–332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Waguespack HF, Malkova L, Forcelli PA, Turchi J. 2018. Effects of systemic cholinergic antagonism on reinforcer devaluation in macaques. Neurosci Lett. 678:62–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Watanabe T, Niki H. 1985. Hippocampal unit activity and delayed response in the monkey. Brain Res. 325:241–254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Webster MJ, Ungerleider LG, Bachevalier J. 1991. Connections of inferior temporal areas TE and TEO with medial temporal-lobe structures in infant and adult monkeys. J Neurosci. 11:1095–1116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Wellman LL, Gale K, Malkova L. 2005. GABAA-mediated inhibition of basolateral amygdala blocks reward devaluation in macaques. J Neurosci. 25:4577–4586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Weniger G, Irle E. 2006. Posterior parahippocampal gyrus lesions in the human impair egocentric learning in a virtual environment. Eur J Neurosci. 24:2406–2414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Weniger G, Siemerkus J, Schmidt-Samoa C, Mehlitz M, Baudewig J, Dechent P, Irle E. 2010. The human parahippocampal cortex subserves egocentric spatial learning during navigation in a virtual maze. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 93:46–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Wicker E, Turchi J, Malkova L, Forcelli PA. 2018. Mediodorsal thalamus is required for discrete phases of goal-directed behavior in macaques. eLife. 7:e37325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Witter MP, Amaral DG. 1991. Entorhinal cortex of the monkey: V. projections to the dentate gyrus, hippocampus, and subicular complex. J Comp Neurol. 307:437–439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Witter MP, Van Hoesen GW, Amaral DG. 1989. Topographic organization of the entorhinal projection to the dentate gyrus of the monkey. J Neurosci. 9:216–228. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Yassa MA, Stark CEL. 2008. Multiple signals of recognition memory in the medial temporal lobe. Hippocampus. 18:945–954. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
LaFlamme, E. M., Waguespack, H. F., Forcelli, P. A., & Malkova, L.
Affiliations
  • Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
  • Department of Pharmacology and Physiology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20057, USA
Corresponding author
Forcelli, Patrick A
ORCID
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2020-12-04
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
2251-2267
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
DOI
10.1093/cercor/bhaa358
PMC
PMC7945022
OpenAlex
W3107955909
Cited by
19
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH099505, R01MH120638)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (TL1TR001431)
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
Keywords
parahippocampal cortex, hippocampus, pharmacological inactivation, functional disconnection, long-term spatial memory, macaque, color cues
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Kynurenic Acid, Macaca mulatta, Male, Microinjections, Neural Pathways, Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists, Parahippocampal Gyrus, Spatial Memory, 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