↓ Skip to main content

Functional connectivity MRI tracks memory networks after maze learning in rodents

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Functional connectivity MRI tracks memory networks after maze learning in rodents
Published in
NeuroImage, August 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.08.013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fatima A. Nasrallah, Xuan Vinh To, Der-Yow Chen, Aryeh Routtenberg, Kai-Hsiang Chuang

Abstract

Learning and memory employs a series of cognitive processes which require the coordination of multiple areas across the brain. However in vivo imaging of cognitive function has been challenging in rodents. Since these processes involve synchronous firing among different brain loci we explored functional connectivity imaging with resting-state fMRI. After 5-day training on a hidden platform watermaze task, notable signal correlations were seen between the hippocampal CA3 and other structures, including thalamus, septum and cingulate cortex, compared to swim control or naïve animals. The connectivity sustained 7 days after training and was reorganized towards the cortex, consistent with views of memory trace distribution leading to memory consolidation. These data demonstrates that, after a cognitive task, altered functional connectivity can be detected in the subsequently sedated rodent using in vivo imaging. This approach paves the way to understand dynamics of area-dependent distribution processes in animal models of cognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 111 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 30%
Researcher 20 17%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Professor 8 7%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 13 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 41 36%
Psychology 13 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 23 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,600,553
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#8,122
of 12,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,955
of 277,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#123
of 202 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 277,483 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 202 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.