The occurrence of cells that encode spatial location (place cells) or head direction (HD cells) in the rat limbic system suggests that these cell types are important for spatial navigation. We sought to determine whether place fields of hippocampal CA1 place cells would be altered in animals receiving lesions of brain areas containing HD cells. Rats received bilateral lesions of anterodorsal thalamic nuclei (ADN), postsubiculum (PoS), or sham lesions, before place cell recording. Although place cells from lesioned animals did not differ from controls on many place-field characteristics, such as place-field size and infield firing rate, the signal was significantly degraded with respect to measures of outfield firing rate, spatial coherence, and information content. Surprisingly, place cells from lesioned animals were more likely modulated by the directional heading of the animal. Rotation of the landmark cue showed that place fields from PoS-lesioned animals were not controlled by the cue and shifted unpredictably between sessions. Although fields from ADN-lesioned animals tended to have less landmark control than fields from control animals, this impairment was mild compared with cells recorded from PoS-lesioned animals. Removal of the prominent visual cue also led to instability of place-field representations in PoS-lesioned, but not ADN-lesioned, animals. Together, these findings suggest that an intact HD system is not necessary for the maintenance of place fields, but lesions of brain areas that convey the HD signal can degrade this signal, and lesions of the PoS might lead to perceptual or mnemonic deficits, leading to place-field instability between sessions.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2021.
All research outputs
#23,302,843
of 34,365,356 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#17,940
of 23,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,722
of 81,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#145
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,365,356 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 81,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
