The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A comparison of the effects of medial prefrontal, cingulate cortex, and cingulum bundle lesions on tests of spatial memory: evidence of a double dissociation between frontal and cingulum bundle contributions
Open accessAbstract
Rats were trained on an automated delayed nonmatching-to-position (DNMP) task. They then received cytotoxic lesions in either the medial prefrontal cortex (n = 13) or the cingulate and retrosplenial cortices (n = 8), or radiofrequency lesions in either the fornix (n = 6) or the cingulum bundle (n = 8). Twelve animals served as surgical controls. Only the fornical and medial prefrontal lesions disrupted DNMP performance, both groups showing a loss of accuracy and an increase in bias. The rats were then trained on a lever discrimination and reversal task, the medial prefrontal and fornical groups showing evidence of an increase in bias when compared with the cingulate cortex group. Finally, the rats were trained on a forced alternation task in a T- maze. Marked deficits were observed in the fornix and cingulum bundle groups, but the medial prefrontal and cingulate groups were unimpaired. The double dissociation between the effects of the prefrontal and cingulum bundle lesions highlights the very different nature of the two spatial tasks (DNMP and T-maze alternation), even though both involved a nonmatching rule. These findings may reflect the involvement of divergent outputs from the fornix-anterior thalamic pathway. One possibility is that anterior thalamic projections to the medial prefrontal cortex are concerned with processing egocentric information, while anterior thalamic projections to temporal regions via the cingulum bundle are concerned with allocentric information. The results also indicate that the effects of conventional lesions in the cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex may be compromised by additional damage to the cingulum bundle.
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In contrast, both fornix and anterior thalamic lesions, as well as hippocampal and medial prefrontal lesions (Aggleton et al., 1992, 1995), persistently impair this task.”
From The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction (2018) · cites this paper as Aggleton et al., 1995
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Statistical principles in experimental design.
Winer, B. J. (1962) · McGraw-Hill Book Company · doi:10.1037/11774-000 · Cited by 27,137
Brain Maps: Structure of the Rat Brain
Swanson, L. W. (1992) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,878
Taube, J., Muller, R., & Ranck, J. (1990) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.10-02-00420.1990 · Cited by 1,809
Functions of the frontal cortex of the rat: A comparative review
Kolb, B. E. (1984) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/0165-0173(84)90018-3 · Cited by 897
The effects of hippocampal lesions upon spatial and non-spatial tests of working memory
Aggleton, J. P., Hunt, P. R., & Rawlins, J. N. P. (1986) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0166-4328(86)90011-2 · Cited by 500
Self-citationContributions of cingulate cortex to two forms of spatial learning and memory
Sutherland, R., Whishaw, I., & Kolb, B. E. (1988) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.08-06-01863.1988 · Cited by 415
Mizumori, S., & Williams, J. (1993) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.13-09-04015.1993 · Cited by 369
The role of the fornix/fimbria and some related subcortical structures in place learning and memory
Sutherland, R. J., & Rodríguez, A. J. (1989) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/s0166-4328(89)80059-2 · Cited by 355
Selectivity of the hippocampal projection to the prelimbic area of the prefrontal cortex in the rat
Jay, T. M., Glowinski, J., & Thierry, A. M. (1989) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(89)91464-9 · Cited by 311
Connections of the retrosplenial dysgranular cortex in the rat
van Groen, T., & Wyss, J. M. (1992) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.903150207 · Cited by 308
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Episodic memory, amnesia, and the hippocampal–anterior thalamic axis
Aggleton, J. P., & Brown, M. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002034 · Cited by 1,879
Self-citationPrefrontal executive and cognitive functions in rodents: neural and neurochemical substrates
Dalley, J. W., Cardinal, R. N., & Robbins, T. W. (2004) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.09.006 · Cited by 1,329
The cingulum bundle: Anatomy, function, and dysfunction
Bubb, E. J., Metzler-Baddeley, C., & Aggleton, J. P. (2018) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.05.008 · Cited by 740
Self-citationCortical afferents of the perirhinal, postrhinal, and entorhinal cortices of the rat
Burwell, R. D., & Amaral, D. G. (1998) · The Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19980824)398:2 · Cited by 734
Ennaceur, A., Neave, N., & Aggleton, J. P. (1997) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/pl00005603 · Cited by 670
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Aggleton, J., Neave, N., Nagle, S., & Sahgal, A.
- Affiliations
- Durham University (GB)
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 1995-11-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 7270-7281
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6578066
- OpenAlex
- W2129684141
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 5.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- spatial memory, medial prefrontal cortex, cingulate cortex, cingulum, fornix, double dissociation, reversal learning, T-maze, retrosplenial cortex
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Discrimination, Psychological, Gyrus Cinguli, Hippocampus, Male, Memory, Rats, Inbred Strains, Space Perception, Prefrontal Cortex, Maze Learning, 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
