Literature DB >> 17707920

Dorsal, ventral, and complete excitotoxic lesions of the hippocampus in rats failed to impair appetitive trace conditioning.

Geneviève Thibaudeau1, Olivier Potvin, Kevin Allen, François Y Doré, Sonia Goulet.   

Abstract

Three experiments examined appetitive trace and delay conditioning of the licking response (LR). In Experiment 1, normal rats were trained in trace conditioning using different trace intervals (2, 4, or 8s) and in delay conditioning (i.e., with a 0-s trace) in order to determine an appropriate trace interval for the following lesion experiments. Only the rats trained with a 2-s trace interval ultimately reached the same level of learning as rats trained in delay conditioning. In Experiments 2A and 2B, the performance of rats with dorsal, ventral, and complete excitotoxic hippocampal lesions was compared to that of sham-operated rats in LR conditioning with a 2-s trace. In Experiment 2B, the performance of rats in trace LR conditioning was also compared to that of rats tested in the delay paradigm. In both experiments, acquisition did not differ in lesioned and sham-operated rats and, in Experiment 2B, it was faster in the delay than in the trace paradigm. These results contrast with those showing that aversive trace conditioning is impaired after hippocampal damage. Experiment 3 examined whether the differential effects of hippocampal lesions on aversive and appetitive trace conditioning could be related to a parametric difference, that is, the relative durations of the conditional stimulus and of the trace interval. Again, hippocampal damage failed to produce a learning impairment. It is suggested that the procedure of aversive, but not of appetitive, trace conditioning is context-specific and that an intact hippocampus is required only in these situations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17707920     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2007.07.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Brain Res        ISSN: 0166-4328            Impact factor:   3.332


  8 in total

1.  Differential acetylcholine release in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus during pavlovian trace and delay conditioning.

Authors:  M Melissa Flesher; Allen E Butt; Brandee L Kinney-Hurd
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 2.877

Review 2.  Towards a unified model of pavlovian conditioning: short review of trace conditioning models.

Authors:  V I Kryukov
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 5.082

3.  Alternative time representation in dopamine models.

Authors:  François Rivest; John F Kalaska; Yoshua Bengio
Journal:  J Comput Neurosci       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 1.621

4.  Changing the rate and hippocampal dependence of trace eyeblink conditioning: slow learning enhances survival of new neurons.

Authors:  Jaylyn Waddell; Megan L Anderson; Tracey J Shors
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 2.877

5.  Training on an Appetitive Trace-Conditioning Task Increases Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis and the Expression of Arc, Erk and CREB Proteins in the Dorsal Hippocampus.

Authors:  Shweta Tripathi; Anita Verma; Sushil K Jha
Journal:  Front Cell Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 5.505

6.  Age-related differences in appetitive trace conditioning and novel object recognition procedures.

Authors:  Hayley J Marshall; Marie A Pezze; Kevin C F Fone; Helen J Cassaday
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 2.877

7.  Temporal-difference reinforcement learning with distributed representations.

Authors:  Zeb Kurth-Nelson; A David Redish
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-10-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Infusions of scopolamine in dorsal hippocampus reduce anticipatory responding in an appetitive trace conditioning procedure.

Authors:  Marie A Pezze; Hayley J Marshall; Helen J Cassaday
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.708

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.