PreprintCited by 57Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Role of the dorsal hippocampus in object memory load

Open access
Sannino, Sara, Russo, Fabio, Torromino, Giulia, Pendolino, Valentina, Calabresi, Paolo, De Leonibus, Elvira·2012·Learning & Memory

Abstract

The dorsal hippocampus is crucial for mammalian spatial memory, but its exact role in item memory is still hotly debated. Recent evidence in humans suggested that the hippocampus might be selectively involved in item short-term memory to deal with an increasing memory load. In this study, we sought to test this hypothesis. To this aim we developed a novel behavioral procedure to study object memory load in mice by progressively increasing the stimulus set size in the spontaneous object recognition task. Using this procedure, we demonstrated that naive mice have a memory span, which is the number of elements they can remember for a short-time interval, of about six objects. Then, we showed that excitotoxic selective lesions of the dorsal hippocampus did not impair novel object discrimination in the condition of low memory load. In contrast, the same lesion impaired novel object discrimination in the high memory load condition, and reduced the object memory span to four objects. These results have important heuristic and clinical implications because they open new perspective toward the understanding of the role of the hippocampus in item memory and in memory span deficits occurring in human pathologies, such as Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia.

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 · 10.1101/lm.025213.111

Cites

43 of 43 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

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sannino, S., Russo, F., Torromino, G., Pendolino, V., Calabresi, P., & De Leonibus, E.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Genetics and Biophysics (IT)
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
  • Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
Venue
Learning & Memory
Published
2012-04-20
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
211-218
ISSN
  • 1072-0502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5485
OpenAlex
W2060763281
Cited by
57
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Learning & Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Alzheimer's Association (NIRG-10-173992)
  • Fondazione Telethon
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
dorsal hippocampus, object memory, memory load, memory span, novel object recognition, excitotoxic lesions, stimulus set size, Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Male, Recognition, Psychology, Mice

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