Literature DB >> 28321961

Aging affects spatial reconstruction more than spatial pattern separation performance even after extended practice.

Rachel Clark1, Asli C Tahan2, Patrick D Watson3, Joan Severson4, Neal J Cohen3, Michelle Voss1,2.   

Abstract

Although the hippocampus experiences age-related anatomical and functional deterioration, the effects of aging vary across hippocampal-dependent cognitive processes. In particular, whether or not the hippocampus is known to be required for a spatial memory process is not an accurate predictor on its own of whether aging will affect performance. Therefore, the primary objective of this study was to compare the effects of healthy aging on a test of spatial pattern separation and a test of spatial relational processing, which are two aspects of spatial memory that uniquely emphasize the use of multiple hippocampal-dependent processes. Spatial pattern separation supports spatial memory by preserving unique representations for distinct locations. Spatial relational processing forms relational representations of objects to locations or between objects and other objects in space. To test our primary objective, 30 young (18-30 years; 21F) and 30 older participants (60-80 years; 21F) all completed a spatial pattern separation task and a task designed to require spatial relational processing through spatial reconstruction. To ensure aging effects were not due to inadequate time to develop optimal strategies or become comfortable with the testing devices, a subset of participants had extended practice across three sessions on each task. Results showed that older adults performed more poorly than young on the spatial reconstruction task that emphasized the use of spatial relational processing, and that age effects persisted even after controlling for pattern separation performance. Further, older adults performed more poorly on spatial reconstruction than young adults even after three testing sessions each separated by 7-10 days, suggesting effects of aging are resistant to extended practice and likely reflect genuine decline in hippocampal memory abilities.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aging; discrimination; memory; practice; spatial

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28321961     DOI: 10.1002/hipo.22727

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hippocampus        ISSN: 1050-9631            Impact factor:   3.899


  5 in total

1.  Hippocampal Subregion Transcriptomic Profiles Reflect Strategy Selection during Cognitive Aging.

Authors:  Garrett Smith; Asha Rani; Ashok Kumar; Jolie Barter; Thomas C Foster
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Reconstructing relational information.

Authors:  Kevin M Horecka; Michael R Dulas; Hillary Schwarb; Heather D Lucas; Melissa Duff; Neal J Cohen
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 3.899

3.  Memory precision of object-location binding is unimpaired in APOE ε4-carriers with spatial navigation deficits.

Authors:  Helena M Gellersen; Gillian Coughlan; Michael Hornberger; Jon S Simons
Journal:  Brain Commun       Date:  2021-04-23

4.  Relational Memory at Short and Long Delays in Individuals With Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Emily L Morrow; Michael R Dulas; Neal J Cohen; Melissa C Duff
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  RbAp48 Protein Is a Critical Component of GPR158/OCN Signaling and Ameliorates Age-Related Memory Loss.

Authors:  Stylianos Kosmidis; Alexandros Polyzos; Lucas Harvey; Mary Youssef; Christine A Denny; Alex Dranovsky; Eric R Kandel
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 9.423

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.