↓ Skip to main content

Pattern separation in the hippocampus: distinct circuits under different conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Structure and Function, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Pattern separation in the hippocampus: distinct circuits under different conditions
Published in
Brain Structure and Function, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00429-018-1659-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Randa Kassab, Frédéric Alexandre

Abstract

Pattern separation is a fundamental hippocampal process thought to be critical for distinguishing similar episodic memories, and has long been recognized as a natural function of the dentate gyrus (DG), supporting autoassociative learning in CA3. Understanding how neural circuits within the DG-CA3 network mediate this process has received much interest, yet the exact mechanisms behind remain elusive. Here, we argue for the case that sparse coding is necessary but not sufficient to ensure efficient separation and, alternatively, propose a possible interaction of distinct circuits which, nevertheless, act in synergy to produce a unitary function of pattern separation. The proposed circuits involve different functional granule-cell populations, a primary population mediates sparsification and provides recurrent excitation to the other populations which are related to additional pattern separation mechanisms with higher degrees of robustness against interference in CA3. A variety of top-down and bottom-up factors, such as motivation, emotion, and pattern similarity, control the selection of circuitry depending on circumstances. According to this framework, a computational model is implemented and tested against model variants in a series of numerical simulations and biological experiments. The results demonstrate that the model combines fast learning, robust pattern separation and high storage capacity. It also accounts for the controversy around the involvement of the DG during memory recall, explains other puzzling findings, and makes predictions that can inform future investigations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 28 35%
Psychology 9 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 25 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,369,757
of 25,010,497 outputs
Outputs from Brain Structure and Function
#436
of 1,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,352
of 334,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Structure and Function
#15
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,010,497 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,748 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
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 334,691 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.