Dorsal Hippocampal Contributions to Unimodal Contextual Conditioning
Open accessAbstract
Although there is general consensus that the hippocampus is not critically involved in the acquisition of fear conditioned to an explicit conditioned stimulus (CS), the extent to which the hippocampus participates in contextual fear conditioning remains unclear. To further characterize the potential role of the hippocampus in contextual fear conditioning, the present experiments examined the effect of excitotoxic lesions of dorsal hippocampus on the acquisition of a novel contextual fear conditioning paradigm in which a unimodal (olfactory) cue served to disambiguate discrete "contexts" within a single behavioral training chamber. Selective lesions of dorsal hippocampus severely attenuated olfactory contextual conditioning without affecting conditioning to an explicit auditory or olfactory CS. Additional experiments indicate that these contextual conditioning deficits cannot be attributed to a lesion-induced decrement in olfactory perception, a preferential impairment of "weak" forms of conditioning, or hyperactivity. Thus, the hippocampus appears to contribute importantly to the acquisition of fear conditioned to explicitly nonspatial, unimodal, temporally, and spatially diffuse contextual stimuli.
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
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.
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?
Context consists of static background cues during training and need not be a spatial place.
“context is not necessarily a spatial location but a set of static background stimuli present during training”
From Phasic vs Sustained Fear in Rats and Humans: Role of the Extended Amygdala in Fear vs Anxiety (2010) · cites this paper as Otto and Poon, 2006
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 46
- Authors
- Otto, T., & Poon, P.
- Affiliations
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2006-06-14
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 6603-6609
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6674031
- OpenAlex
- W2119231364
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 2.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0316247, 9817145)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- dorsal hippocampus, contextual fear conditioning, olfactory conditioning, excitotoxic lesions, fear memory, olfactory cues, auditory conditioning
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Association Learning, Behavior, Animal, Conditioning, Psychological, Fear, Hippocampus, Male, Motor Activity, Olfactory Pathways, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Freezing Reaction, Cataleptic, 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