Distinct ensemble codes in hippocampal areas CA3 and CA1

Science

Volumn 305, Issue 5688, 2004, Pages 1295-1298

  Leutgeb, Stefan ^a   Leutgeb, Jill K ^a   Treves, Alessandro ^a,b   Moser, May Britt ^a   Moser, Edvard I ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b SISSA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIFFERENTIATION (CALCULUS); ENCLOSURES; POPULATION STATISTICS; STRUCTURE (COMPOSITION);

HIPPOCAMPUS; PYRAMIDAL CELLS; STRUCTURAL DIFFERENTIATIONS;

CELL CULTURE;

BIOLOGY;

ARTICLE; CELL ACTIVATION; CELL FUNCTION; CELL MATURATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HIPPOCAMPUS; NERVE CELL DIFFERENTIATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYRAMIDAL NERVE CELL; RAT;

ACTION POTENTIALS; ANIMALS; BRAIN MAPPING; CUES; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; ENTORHINAL CORTEX; HIPPOCAMPUS; MALE; MEMORY; NERVE NET; NEURONS; PYRAMIDAL CELLS; RATS; RATS, LONG-EVANS; SPACE PERCEPTION;

HIPPOCAMPUS HIPPOCAMPUS;

EID: 4344616877     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1100265     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. D. Marr, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 262, 23 (1971).
2. J. O'Keefe, L. Nadel, The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map (Clarendon, Oxford, UK, 1978).
3. L. R. Squire, Psychol. Rev. 99, 195 (1992).
4. H. Eichenbaum, Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 1, 41 (2000).
5. D. G. Amaral, M. P. Witter, Neuroscience 31, 571 (1989).
6. A. Treves, Hippocampus 14, 539 (2004).
7. R. U. Muller, J. L. Kubie, J. B. Ranck, J. Neurosci. 7, 1935 (1987).
8. R. U. Muller, J. L. Kubie, J. Neurosci. 7, 1951 (1987).
9. M. A. Wilson, B. L. McNaughton, Science 261, 1055 (1993).
10. C. A. Barnes, B. L. McNaughton, S. J. Mizumori, B. W. Leonard, L. H. Lin, Prog. Brain Res. 83, 287 (1990).
11. D. O. Hebb, The Organization of Behavior (Wiley, New York, 1949).
12. B. L. McNaughton, R. G. M. Morris, Trends Neurosci. 10, 408 (1987).
13. A. Treves, E. T. Rolls, Hippocampus 2, 189 (1992).
14. R. P. Kesner, P. E. Gilbert, G. V. Wallenstein, Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 10, 260 (2000).
15. G. J. Quirk, R. U. Muller, J. L. Kubie, J. B. Ranck Jr., J. Neurosci. 12, 1945 (1992).
16. P. E. Sharp, Behav. Brain Res. 85, 71 (1997).
17. W. E. Skaggs, B. L. McNaughton, J. Neurosci. 18, 8455 (1998).
18. H. Tanila, Hippocampus 9, 235 (1999).
19. L. E. Jarrard, Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 89, 400 (1975).
20. Orthogonalization (pattern separation) refers to the tendency to decorrelate representations, assessed relative to the baseline expected for unrelated conditions. Orthogonalization is expressed as a difference in both the subset of active cells and the relative firing locations of cells that were active in each of the conditions (SOM Text). Remapping is a special case limited to the spatial domain.
21. A total of 146 CA3 and 244 CA1 pyramidal cells were compared across rooms in 10 rats. Sixty-four CA3 cells and 76 contralateral CA1 cells were recorded simultaneously (SOM Text).
22. V. H. Brun et al., Science 296, 2243 (2002).
23. G. Winocur, J. Olds, J. Comp. Physiol. Physiol. 92, 312 (1978).
24. P. W. Frankland, V. Cestari, R. K. Filipkowski, R. J. McDonald, A. J. Silva, Behav. Neurosci. 112, 863 (1998).
25. K. Nakazawa et al., Science 297, 211 (2002).
26. I. Lee, D. Yoganarasimha, G. Rao, J. J. Knierim, Nature 430, 456 (2004).
27. A. Samsonovich, B. L. McNaughton, J. Neurosci. 17, 5900 (1997).
28. R. Hirsh, Behav. Biol. 12, 421 (1974).
29. S. G. Anagnostaras, G. D. Gale, M. S. Fanselow, Hippocampus 11, 8 (2001).
30. M. L. Shapiro, H. Tanila, H. Eichenbaum, Hippocampus 7, 624 (1997).
31. In retrospect, the stronger orthogonalization in CA3 provides an explanation for the divergent results obtained by two previous studies of place-cell remapping in visually identical environments (17, 18). One of the procedural differences between these studies was the recording location. Remapping was complete when most cells were from CA3 (18) but only partial with recordings in CA1 (17).
32. J. H. Freeman Jr., C. Cuppemell, F. Flannery, M. Gabriel, J. Neurosci. 16, 1538 (1996).
33. S. Leutgeb, S. J. Mizumori, Neuroscience 112, 655 (2002).
34. C. Lever, T. Wills, F. Cacucci, N. Burgess, J. O'Keefe, Nature 416, 90 (2002).
35. K. Nakazawa et al., Neuron 38, 305 (2003).
36. A. Vazdarjanova, J. F. Guzowski, J. Neurosci. 24, 6489 (2004).
37. We thank I. M. F. Hammer, K. Haugen, K. Jenssen, S. Molden, R. Skjerpeng, and H. Waade for assistance and J. Knierim and O. Paulsen for comments. The work was supported by a Centre of Excellence grant from the Norwegian Research Council