Limits...
Place field repetition and purely local remapping in a multicompartment environment.

Spiers HJ, Hayman RM, Jovalekic A, Marozzi E, Jeffery KJ - Cereb. Cortex (2013)

Bottom Line: Some studies report that place cells can disambiguate different compartments, while others report that they do not.Second, this repetition does not diminish with extended experience.Third, remapping was found to be purely local for both geometric change and contextual change.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cognitive, Perceptual and Brain Sciences, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, Institute of Behavioural Neuroscience, University College London, UK.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Changes in peak rates of place cell firing when the environments were changed. (A) and (B) are from the context-change manipulation, (C) and (D) from the wall-removal one. (A) In the context-change trials, overall peak rates became slightly more variable between the baseline conditions and the context-change condition, but this was not significant, even for the compartment that was actually changed (black bar). (B) Within-cell between-condition correlation of peak rates, however, showed a significant change, indicating variability of firing rate in the changed compartment (black bar) relative to the unchanged compartments/conditions. (C) Removal of the walls separating compartments 1–3 caused a drop in the overall firing rates in those regions of the environment (black bars), but not in the compartment that remained enclosed. (D) Correlations in peak rate firing dropped in the 2 central changed compartments in the changed condition when compared with the unchanged condition—the end compartment retained a relatively high correlation, perhaps because 3 of its 4 walls still remained. The firing rates in the unchanged compartment remained highly correlated throughout. *P < 0.05, (*)P < 0.05 only for the second comparison (wall-removal vs. second baseline).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400414&req=5

BHT198F9: Changes in peak rates of place cell firing when the environments were changed. (A) and (B) are from the context-change manipulation, (C) and (D) from the wall-removal one. (A) In the context-change trials, overall peak rates became slightly more variable between the baseline conditions and the context-change condition, but this was not significant, even for the compartment that was actually changed (black bar). (B) Within-cell between-condition correlation of peak rates, however, showed a significant change, indicating variability of firing rate in the changed compartment (black bar) relative to the unchanged compartments/conditions. (C) Removal of the walls separating compartments 1–3 caused a drop in the overall firing rates in those regions of the environment (black bars), but not in the compartment that remained enclosed. (D) Correlations in peak rate firing dropped in the 2 central changed compartments in the changed condition when compared with the unchanged condition—the end compartment retained a relatively high correlation, perhaps because 3 of its 4 walls still remained. The firing rates in the unchanged compartment remained highly correlated throughout. *P < 0.05, (*)P < 0.05 only for the second comparison (wall-removal vs. second baseline).

Mentions: Remapping was also explored by looking at how firing rates might have changed in response to the manipulation. The results of the peak rate analysis are shown in Figure 9A. Overall firing rates did not change significantly between the baseline and context-change conditions, even for the compartment in which the change was actually made, as evidenced by a 2-way repeated-measures ANOVA of compartment against trial type revealing no effect of compartment [F3,83 = 0.49, NS], no effect of trial type [F2,84 = 0.33, NS], and no interaction [F6,168 = 0.87, NS].Figure 9.


Place field repetition and purely local remapping in a multicompartment environment.

Spiers HJ, Hayman RM, Jovalekic A, Marozzi E, Jeffery KJ - Cereb. Cortex (2013)

Changes in peak rates of place cell firing when the environments were changed. (A) and (B) are from the context-change manipulation, (C) and (D) from the wall-removal one. (A) In the context-change trials, overall peak rates became slightly more variable between the baseline conditions and the context-change condition, but this was not significant, even for the compartment that was actually changed (black bar). (B) Within-cell between-condition correlation of peak rates, however, showed a significant change, indicating variability of firing rate in the changed compartment (black bar) relative to the unchanged compartments/conditions. (C) Removal of the walls separating compartments 1–3 caused a drop in the overall firing rates in those regions of the environment (black bars), but not in the compartment that remained enclosed. (D) Correlations in peak rate firing dropped in the 2 central changed compartments in the changed condition when compared with the unchanged condition—the end compartment retained a relatively high correlation, perhaps because 3 of its 4 walls still remained. The firing rates in the unchanged compartment remained highly correlated throughout. *P < 0.05, (*)P < 0.05 only for the second comparison (wall-removal vs. second baseline).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400414&req=5

BHT198F9: Changes in peak rates of place cell firing when the environments were changed. (A) and (B) are from the context-change manipulation, (C) and (D) from the wall-removal one. (A) In the context-change trials, overall peak rates became slightly more variable between the baseline conditions and the context-change condition, but this was not significant, even for the compartment that was actually changed (black bar). (B) Within-cell between-condition correlation of peak rates, however, showed a significant change, indicating variability of firing rate in the changed compartment (black bar) relative to the unchanged compartments/conditions. (C) Removal of the walls separating compartments 1–3 caused a drop in the overall firing rates in those regions of the environment (black bars), but not in the compartment that remained enclosed. (D) Correlations in peak rate firing dropped in the 2 central changed compartments in the changed condition when compared with the unchanged condition—the end compartment retained a relatively high correlation, perhaps because 3 of its 4 walls still remained. The firing rates in the unchanged compartment remained highly correlated throughout. *P < 0.05, (*)P < 0.05 only for the second comparison (wall-removal vs. second baseline).
Mentions: Remapping was also explored by looking at how firing rates might have changed in response to the manipulation. The results of the peak rate analysis are shown in Figure 9A. Overall firing rates did not change significantly between the baseline and context-change conditions, even for the compartment in which the change was actually made, as evidenced by a 2-way repeated-measures ANOVA of compartment against trial type revealing no effect of compartment [F3,83 = 0.49, NS], no effect of trial type [F2,84 = 0.33, NS], and no interaction [F6,168 = 0.87, NS].Figure 9.

Bottom Line: Some studies report that place cells can disambiguate different compartments, while others report that they do not.Second, this repetition does not diminish with extended experience.Third, remapping was found to be purely local for both geometric change and contextual change.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Cognitive, Perceptual and Brain Sciences, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, Institute of Behavioural Neuroscience, University College London, UK.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus