Cited by 65Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Dissociable and paradoxical roles of rat medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex in visual serial reversal learning

Open access
Hervig, M E, Fiddian, L, Piilgaard, L, Božič, T, Blanco-Pozo, M, Knudsen, C, Olesen, S F, Alsiö, J +1 more·2020·Cerebral Cortex

Abstract

Much evidence suggests that reversal learning is mediated by cortico-striatal circuitries with the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) playing a prominent role. The OFC is a functionally heterogeneous region, but potential differential roles of lateral (lOFC) and medial (mOFC) portions in visual reversal learning have yet to be determined. We investigated the effects of pharmacological inactivation of mOFC and lOFC on a deterministic serial visual reversal learning task for rats. For reference, we also targeted other areas previously implicated in reversal learning: prelimbic (PrL) and infralimbic (IL) prefrontal cortex, and basolateral amygdala (BLA). Inactivating mOFC and lOFC produced opposite effects; lOFC impairing, and mOFC improving, performance in the early, perseverative phase specifically. Additionally, mOFC inactivation enhanced negative feedback sensitivity, while lOFC inactivation diminished feedback sensitivity in general. mOFC and lOFC inactivation also affected novel visual discrimination learning differently; lOFC inactivation paradoxically improved learning, and mOFC inactivation had no effect. We also observed dissociable roles of the OFC and the IL/PrL. Whereas the OFC inactivation affected only perseveration, IL/PrL inactivation improved learning overall. BLA inactivation did not affect perseveration, but improved the late phase of reversal learning. These results support opponent roles of the rodent mOFC and lOFC in deterministic visual reversal learning.

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/bhz144

Cites

114 of 114 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?

  • This rule-based reversal capability may not occur in rodents.

    “may not occur in rodents (Rolls, 2019c, 2021a; Hervig et al., 2020).”

    From The orbitofrontal cortex: reward, emotion and depression (2020) · cites this paper as Hervig et al., 2020

  • Rodent reward reversal learning does not so far appear to be of the same powerful type as the rule-based system present in primates, which allows switching to a different stimulus even previously associated with punishment when no reward is received when it was expected by a behavioural choice on a single trial.

    “Fifth, although reward reversal learning is studied in rodents (Hervig et al., 2020), it does not so far appear to be of the same powerful type as the rule-based system present in primates, which allows switching to a different stimulus even previously associated with punishment when no reward is received when it was expected by a behavioural choice on a single trial (Thorpe et al., 1983; Rolls et”

    From The orbitofrontal cortex: reward, emotion and depression (2020) · cites this paper as Hervig et al., 2020

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
Hervig, M. E., Fiddian, L., Piilgaard, L., Božič, T., Blanco-Pozo, M., Knudsen, C., Olesen, S. F., Alsiö, J., & Robbins, T. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Hervig, M E
Venue
Cerebral Cortex
Published
2019-07-25
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
1016-1029
ISSN
  • 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2199
OpenAlex
W2962948205
Cited by
65
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 3
FWCI
5.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cerebral Cortex (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (104631/Z/14/Z)
  • Lundbeck Foundation (R182-2014-2810, R210-2015-2982)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
medial orbitofrontal cortex, lateral orbitofrontal cortex, serial reversal learning, corticostriatal circuits, pharmacological inactivation, perseveration, negative feedback sensitivity, infralimbic cortex, prelimbic cortex, basolateral amygdala, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Choice Behavior, Male, Reversal Learning, Reward, Visual Perception, Prefrontal Cortex, Rats, Basolateral Nuclear Complex

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