↓ Skip to main content

Anatomical Inputs From the Sensory and Value Structures to the Tail of the Rat Striatum

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Anatomical Inputs From the Sensory and Value Structures to the Tail of the Rat Striatum
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2018.00030
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haiyan Jiang, Hyoung F. Kim

Abstract

The caudal region of the rodent striatum, called the tail of the striatum (TS), is a relatively small area but might have a distinct function from other striatal subregions. Recent primate studies showed that this part of the striatum has a unique function in encoding long-term value memory of visual objects for habitual behavior. This function might be due to its specific connectivity. We identified inputs to the rat TS and compared those with inputs to the dorsomedial striatum (DMS) in the same animals. The TS directly received anatomical inputs from both sensory structures and value-coding regions, but the DMS did not. First, inputs from the sensory cortex and sensory thalamus to the TS were found; visual, auditory, somatosensory and gustatory cortex and thalamus projected to the TS but not to the DMS. Second, two value systems innervated the TS; dopamine and serotonin neurons in the lateral part of the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) and dorsal raphe nucleus projected to the TS, respectively. The DMS received inputs from the separate group of dopamine neurons in the medial part of the SNc. In addition, learning-related regions of the limbic system innervated the TS; the temporal areas and the basolateral amygdala selectively innervated the TS, but not the DMS. Our data showed that both sensory and value-processing structures innervated the TS, suggesting its plausible role in value-guided sensory-motor association for habitual behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 25%
Student > Bachelor 17 14%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 22 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 61 52%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 14%
Unspecified 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 25 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,606,163
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#929
of 1,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,173
of 326,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 326,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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.