Cited by 196Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Distinct roles of medial and lateral entorhinal cortex in spatial cognition

Van Cauter, T., Camon, J., Alvernhe, A., Elduayen, C., Sargolini, F., Save, E.·2013·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

It is known that the entorhinal cortex plays a crucial role in spatial cognition in rodents. Neuroanatomical and electrophysiological data suggest that there is a functional distinction between 2 subregions within the entorhinal cortex, the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC), and the lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC). Rats with MEC or LEC lesions were trained in 2 navigation tasks requiring allothetic (water maze task) or idiothetic (path integration) information processing and 2-object exploration tasks allowing testing of spatial and nonspatial processing of intramaze objects. MEC lesions mildly affected place navigation in the water maze and produced a path integration deficit. They also altered the processing of spatial information in both exploration tasks while sparing the processing of nonspatial information. LEC lesions did not affect navigation abilities in both the water maze and the path integration tasks. They altered spatial and nonspatial processing in the object exploration task but not in the one-trial recognition task. Overall, these results indicate that the MEC is important for spatial processing and path integration. The LEC has some influence on both spatial and nonspatial processes, suggesting that the 2 kinds of information interact at the level of the EC.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cercor/bhs033

Cites

48 of 48 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
Van Cauter, T., Camon, J., Alvernhe, A., Elduayen, C., Sargolini, F., & Save, E.
Affiliations
  • Charles Darwin University (AU)
  • Institute of Science and Technology Austria (AT)
  • Aix-Marseille Université (FR)
  • Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives (FR)
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2012-02-22
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
451-459
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2128520379
Cited by
196
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 14
FWCI
7.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Institute of Science and Technology Austria (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, entorhinal cortex, spatial cognition, path integration, place navigation, water maze, object exploration, object recognition, lesion studies, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Cognition, Exploratory Behavior, Male, Space Perception, Spatial Behavior, Entorhinal Cortex, Maze Learning, 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