Cited by 568Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Object recognition memory and the rodent hippocampus

Open access
Broadbent, Nicola J., Gaskin, Stephane, Squire, Larry R., Clark, Robert E.·2010·Learning & Memory

Abstract

In rodents, the novel object recognition task (NOR) has become a benchmark task for assessing recognition memory. Yet, despite its widespread use, a consensus has not developed about which brain structures are important for task performance. We assessed both the anterograde and retrograde effects of hippocampal lesions on performance in the NOR task. Rats received 12 5-min exposures to two identical objects and then received either bilateral lesions of the hippocampus or sham surgery 1 d, 4 wk, or 8 wk after the final exposure. On a retention test 2 wk after surgery, the 1-d and 4-wk hippocampal lesion groups exhibited impaired object recognition memory. In contrast, the 8-wk hippocampal lesion group performed similarly to controls, and both groups exhibited a preference for the novel object. These same rats were then given four postoperative tests using unique object pairs and a 3-h delay between the exposure phase and the test phase. Hippocampal lesions produced moderate and reliable memory impairment. The results suggest that the hippocampus is important for object recognition 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 · 10.1101/lm.1650110

Cites

25 of 25 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Squire LR, Clark RE, Bayley P. 2004. Medial temporal lobe functions and memory. In The cognitive neurosciences, 3rd ed. (ed. M Gazzaniga), pp. 691-708. MIT, Cambridge, MA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Broadbent, N. J., Gaskin, S., Squire, L. R., & Clark, R. E.
Affiliations
University of California System (US)
Venue
Learning & Memory
Published
2009-12-22
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
5-11
ISSN
  • 1072-0502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5485
OpenAlex
W2046922635
Cited by
568
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 21
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Learning & Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0542013)
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • Kavli Foundation
  • National Institute on Aging (P50AG005131, P50-AG05131)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50 AG05131, AG05131, R01MH024600)
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
object recognition memory, hippocampus, hippocampal lesions, anterograde amnesia, retrograde amnesia, memory impairment, rats
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Exploratory Behavior, Hippocampus, Male, Memory, Random Allocation, Time Factors, 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