The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differential effects of fornix and caudate nucleus lesions on two radial maze tasks: evidence for multiple memory systems
Open accessAbstract
The present experiments were designed to examine the hypothesis that the mammalian brain contains anatomically distinct memory systems. Rats with bilateral lesions of caudate nucleus or fimbria-fornix and a control group were tested postoperatively on 1 of 2 versions of the radial maze task. In a standard win-shift version, each of the 8 arms of the maze was baited once, and the number of errors (revisits) in the first 8 choices of each trial was recorded. Fimbria-fornix rats were impaired in choice accuracy, while caudate animals were unimpaired relative to controls. Different groups of rats with similar lesions were tested on a newly developed win-stay version of the radial maze, in which the location of 4 randomly selected baited arms was signaled by a light at the entrance to each arm, and which required rats to revisit arms in which reinforcement had been previously acquired within a trial. Rats with fimbria-fornix lesions were superior to controls in choice accuracy on the win-stay radial maze task, while caudate animals were impaired relative to controls. The results demonstrate a double dissociation of the mnemonic functions of the hippocampus and caudate nucleus. Some implications of the presence of 2 memory systems in the mammalian brain are discussed.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cohen, N. J., & Squire, L. R. (1980) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7414331 · Cited by 2,296
Remembrance of places passed: Spatial memory in rats.
Olton, D. S., & Samuelson, R. J. (1976) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes · doi:10.1037//0097-7403.2.2.97 · Cited by 1,998
Eichenbaum, H., Kuperstein, M., Fagan, A., & Nagode, J. (1987) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.07-03-00716.1987 · Cited by 378
Cited by
Memory and the hippocampus: A synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans.
Squire, L. R. (1992) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.99.2.195 · Cited by 5,376
Memory - A century of consolidation
McGaugh, J. L. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5451.248 · Cited by 4,250
The Medial Temporal Lobe Memory System
Squire, L. R., & Zola-Morgan, S. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1896849 · Cited by 3,282
The role of the basal ganglia in habit formation
Yin, H. H., & Knowlton, B. J. (2006) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1919 · Cited by 2,402
Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective
Squire, L. R. (2004) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2004.06.005 · Cited by 2,269
Metadata
- Authors
- Packard, M., Hirsh, R., & White, N.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 1989-05-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1465-1472
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- OpenAlex
- W2151236979
- Cited by
- 971
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differential effects of fornix and caudate nucleus lesions on two radial maze tasks: evidence for multiple memory systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.09-05-01465.1989
- The paper
- Packard, M., Hirsh, R., & White, N. (1989). Differential effects of fornix and caudate nucleus lesions on two radial maze tasks: evidence for multiple memory systems. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.09-05-01465.1989
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.