Dorsal hippocampal involvement in conditioned-response timing and maintenance of temporal information in the absence of the CS

Involvement of the dorsal hippocampus (DHPC) in conditioned-response timing and maintaining temporal information across time gaps was examined in an appetitive Pavlovian conditioning task, in which rats with sham and DHPC lesions were first conditioned to a 15-s visual cue. After acquisition, the subjects received a series of non-reinforced test trials, on which the visual cue was extended (45 s) and gaps of different duration, 0.5, 2.5, and 7.5 s, interrupted the early portion of the cue. Dorsal hippocampal-lesioned subjects underestimated the target duration of 15 s and showed broader response distributions than the control subjects on the no-gap trials in the first few blocks of test, but the accuracy and precision of their timing reached the level of that of the control subjects by the last block. On the gap trials, the DHPC-lesioned subjects showed greater rightward shifts in response distributions than the control subjects. We discussed these lesion effects in terms of temporal versus non-temporal processing (response inhibition, generalisation decrement, and inhibitory conditioning)

A within-subjects, within-task demonstration of intact spatial reference memory and impaired spatial working memory in glutamate receptor-A-deficient mice

Gene-targeted mice lacking the AMPA receptor subunit glutamate receptor-A (GluRA) (GluR1) and wild-type controls were compared on a radial-maze task in which the same three of six arms were always baited, but in which the rewards of milk were not replaced within a trial. This procedure allowed not only a within-subjects but also a within-trials assessment of both spatial working memory (WM) and reference memory (RM) in GluRA-/- mice, using identical spatial cues. In experiment 1, the GluRA-/- mice made more WM and RM errors during task acquisition. However, separate groups of GluRA-/- and wild-type mice (experiment 2) acquired a purely RM version of the task at a similar rate, using a paradigm with which it was not possible to make WM errors (doors prevented mice from re-entering an arm that they had already visited on that trial). In contrast, mice with hippocampal lesions were dramatically impaired. These results are consistent with the possibility that the WM impairment in the GluRA-/- mice during experiment 1 produced interference that disrupted RM acquisition. A WM component was therefore introduced after RM acquisition in experiment 2 (i.e., the mice were no longer prevented from re-entering a previously visited arm). The GluRA-/- mice now made considerably more WM errors than did wild-type mice, but simultaneously, RM was only mildly and transiently impaired. These experiments provide additional evidence of a selective spatial WM deficit coexisting with intact spatial RM acquisition in GluRA-/- mice, suggesting that different neuronal mechanisms within the hippocampus may support these different kinds of information processing