↓ Skip to main content

What does spatial alternation tell us about retrosplenial cortex function?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
What does spatial alternation tell us about retrosplenial cortex function?
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew J. D. Nelson, Anna L. Powell, Joshua D. Holmes, Seralynne D. Vann, John P. Aggleton

Abstract

The retrosplenial cortex supports navigation, but there are good reasons to suppose that the retrosplenial cortex has a very different role in spatial memory from that of the hippocampus and anterior thalamic nuclei. For example, retrosplenial lesions appear to have little or no effect on standard tests of spatial alternation. To examine these differences, the current study sought to determine whether the retrosplenial cortex is important for just one spatial cue type (e.g., allocentric, directional or intra-maze cues) or whether the retrosplenial cortex helps the animal switch between competing spatial strategies or competing cue types. Using T-maze alternation, retrosplenial lesion rats were challenged with situations in which the available spatial information between the sample and test phases was changed, so taxing the interaction between different cue types. Clear lesion deficits emerged when intra- and extra-maze cues were placed in conflict (by rotating the maze between the sample and choice phases), or when the animals were tested in the dark in a double-maze. Finally, temporary inactivation of the retrosplenial cortex by muscimol infusions resulted in a striking deficit on standard T-maze alternation, indicating that, over time, other sites may be able to compensate for the loss of the retrosplenial cortex. This pattern of results is consistent with the impoverished use of both allocentric and directional information, exacerbated by an impaired ability to switch between different cue types.

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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 1%
United States 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 97 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 33%
Student > Master 12 12%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 15 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 38 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 18%
Psychology 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 18 18%
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 05 June 2015.
All research outputs
#13,200,930
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,526
of 3,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,838
of 265,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#38
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 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 3,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 265,512 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.