| Title |
Impaired spatial working memory after anterior thalamic lesions: recovery with cerebrolysin and enrichment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Structure and Function, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00429-015-1015-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena A. Loukavenko, Mathieu Wolff, Guillaume L. Poirier, John C. Dalrymple-Alford |
| Abstract |
Lesions to the anterior thalamic nuclei (ATN) in rats produce robust spatial memory deficits that reflect their influence as part of an extended hippocampal system. Recovery of spatial working memory after ATN lesions was examined using a 30-day administration of the neurotrophin cerebrolysin and/or an enriched housing environment. As expected, ATN lesions in standard-housed rats given saline produced severely impaired reinforced spatial alternation when compared to standard-housed rats with sham lesions. Both cerebrolysin and enrichment substantially improved this working memory deficit, including accuracy on trials that required attention to distal cues for successful performance. The combination of cerebrolysin and enrichment was more effective than either treatment alone when the delay between successive runs in a trial was increased to 40 s. Compared to the intact rats, ATN lesions in standard-housed groups produced substantial reduction in c-Fos expression in the retrosplenial cortex, which remained low after cerebrolysin and enrichment treatments. Evidence that multiple treatment strategies restore some memory functions in the current lesion model reinforces the prospect for treatments in human diencephalic amnesia. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 6 | 29% |
| Psychology | 5 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2015.
All research outputs
#19,702,729
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Brain Structure and Function
#1,236
of 1,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,763
of 260,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Structure and Function
#25
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.