Scopolamine Reduces Persistent Activity Related to Long-Term Encoding in the Parahippocampal Gyrus during Delayed Matching in Humans
Open accessAbstract
Recent computational modeling and slice physiology studies have suggested that long-term encoding may depend on sustained spiking during brief memory delays in parahippocampal neurons, and that this persistent spiking activity is modulated by effects of acetylcholine at muscarinic receptors. Our recent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study has shown that sustained parahippocampal delay period activity during delayed match-to-sample performance in healthy young individuals predicted subsequent memory of visual stimuli on a recognition memory assessment 20 min later (Schon et al., 2004). The current study combined this fMRI paradigm with a pharmacological manipulation to test whether this long-term encoding-related delay activity is reduced in subjects who receive the muscarinic cholinergic antagonist scopolamine before fMRI scanning. Subsequent memory was predicted by sustained activity during brief memory delays bilaterally in the perirhinal/entorhinal cortex, in the right posterior parahippocampal and mid-fusiform gyri, and in the hippocampal body in healthy young individuals without a scopolamine challenge. This activity was reduced in subjects receiving scopolamine. The results are consistent with computational modeling data and behavioral pharmacological studies, suggesting that long-term encoding-related activity may be reduced if cholinergic receptors are blocked by scopolamine.
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?
Several studies demonstrated disruption of encoding-evoked neuronal activity in hippocampal, para-hippocampal and entorhinal regions and resulting impairments in recognition memory after scopolamine.
“several studies demonstrated disruption of encoding-evoked neuronal activity in these regions and resulting impairments in recognition memory (Rosier et al, 1999; Schon et al, 2005).”
From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Schon et al, 2005
This supports the hypothesis that muscarinic activation of persistent spiking could underlie the maintenance of activity for encoding into long term memory.
“This supports the hypothesis that muscarinic activation of persistent spiking could underlie the maintenance of activity for encoding into long term memory (Schon et al., 2005; Hasselmo and Stern, 2006).”
From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Schon et al., 2005
Injections of scopolamine in human subjects decrease the fMRI activity in entorhinal cortex and perirhinal cortex associated with subsequent memory for the sample stimuli.
“Injections of scopolamine in human subjects decreases the fMRI activity in entorhinal cortex and perirhinal cortex associated with subsequent memory for the sample stimuli (Schon et al, 2005).”
From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Schon et al, 2005
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 64 · Cited by 132
- Authors
- Schon, K., Atri, A., Hasselmo, M. E., Tricarico, M. D., LoPresti, M. L., & Stern, C. E.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Stern, Chantal E.
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2005-10-05
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 40
- Pages
- 9112-9123
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6725748
- OpenAlex
- W2013089722
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 5.86
- 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)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (MH60013, MH61492)
- National Institutes of Health (MH60013)
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH 60013, R01MH060013, R01MH061492)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 16454, R01DA016454)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS041636)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Keywords
- scopolamine, parahippocampal gyrus, long-term memory encoding, delayed matching-to-sample, delay-period activity, muscarinic receptors, cholinergic modulation, recognition memory, perirhinal cortex, entorhinal cortex, hippocampus
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Memory, Oxygen, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Scopolamine, Time Factors, Visual Perception, Muscarinic Antagonists, Parahippocampal Gyrus
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