Display options
Cite
Robinson S, Bucci DJ. Damage to posterior parietal cortex impairs two forms of relational learning. Front Integr Neurosci. 2012;6:45doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00045.
Robinson, S., & Bucci, D. J. (2012). Damage to posterior parietal cortex impairs two forms of relational learning. Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 645. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2012.00045
Robinson, Siobhan, and Bucci, David J. "Damage to posterior parietal cortex impairs two forms of relational learning." Frontiers in integrative neuroscience vol. 6 (2012): 45. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2012.00045
Robinson S, Bucci DJ. Damage to posterior parietal cortex impairs two forms of relational learning. Front Integr Neurosci. 2012 Jul 12;6:45. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00045. eCollection 2012. PMID: 22807894; PMCID: PMC3395032.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Integr Neurosci. 2012 Jul 12;6:45. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00045. eCollection 2012.

Damage to posterior parietal cortex impairs two forms of relational learning.

Frontiers in integrative neuroscience

Siobhan Robinson, David J Bucci

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover NH, USA.

PMID: 22807894 PMCID: PMC3395032 DOI: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00045

Abstract

The posterior parietal cortex (PPC) is a component of a major cortico-hippocampal circuit that is involved in relational learning, yet the specific contribution of PPC to hippocampal-dependent learning is unresolved. To address this, two experiments were carried out to test the effects of PPC damage on tasks that involve forming associations between multiple sensory stimuli. In Experiment 1, sham or electrolytic lesions of the PPC were made before rats were tested on a three-phase sensory preconditioning task. During the first phase, half of the training trials consisted of pairings of an auditory stimulus followed by a light. During the other trials, a second auditory stimulus was presented alone. In the next phase of training, the same light was paired with food, but no auditory stimuli were presented. During the final phase of the procedure both auditory stimuli were presented in the absence of reinforcement during a single test session. As is typically observed during the test session, control rats exhibited greater conditioned responding to the auditory cue that was previously paired with light compared to the unpaired cue. In contrast, PPC-lesioned rats responded equally to both auditory cues. In Experiment 2, PPC-lesioned and control rats were trained in a compound feature negative discrimination task consisting of reinforced presentations of a tone-alone and non-reinforced simultaneous presentations of a light-tone compound stimulus. Control rats but not rats with damage to the PPC successfully learned the discrimination. Collectively, these results support the idea that the PPC contributes to relational learning involving multimodal sensory stimuli, perhaps by regulating the attentional processing of conditioned stimuli.

Keywords: associative learning; attention; conditioned inhibition; medial temporal lobe; parietal cortex

References

  1. Hippocampus. 2007;17(9):709-22 - PubMed
  2. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2006 Dec;16(6):693-700 - PubMed
  3. Behav Neurosci. 2005 Dec;119(6):1580-7 - PubMed
  4. Behav Brain Res. 1987 Feb;23(2):127-45 - PubMed
  5. J Comp Neurol. 1992 Jan 8;315(2):200-16 - PubMed
  6. Hippocampus. 1999;9(2):143-57 - PubMed
  7. J Comp Neurol. 2003 Aug 25;463(3):249-63 - PubMed
  8. J Neurophysiol. 1981 Oct;46(4):755-72 - PubMed
  9. J Neurosci. 2003 Jan 15;23(2):676-81 - PubMed
  10. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2009 Feb;91(2):114-20 - PubMed
  11. Exp Brain Res. 1994;100(1):67-84 - PubMed
  12. Behav Brain Res. 2000 Jul;112(1-2):69-75 - PubMed
  13. Behav Neurosci. 2001 Dec;115(6):1357-62 - PubMed
  14. Psychol Rev. 1980 Nov;87(6):532-52 - PubMed
  15. Hippocampus. 1995;5(5):375-89 - PubMed
  16. Behav Neurosci. 2011 Aug;125(4):578-87 - PubMed
  17. Hippocampus. 2002;12(5):648-56 - PubMed
  18. Behav Brain Res. 1989 Aug 1;34(1-2):97-109 - PubMed
  19. Learn Behav. 2007 Feb;35(1):11-8 - PubMed
  20. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2009 Feb;91(2):197-206 - PubMed
  21. Behav Brain Res. 1996 Oct;80(1-2):123-36 - PubMed
  22. J Comp Neurol. 1998 Aug 24;398(2):179-205 - PubMed
  23. Fed Proc. 1978 Jul;37(9):2258-61 - PubMed
  24. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000 Jun;911:25-42 - PubMed
  25. Eur J Neurosci. 2007 Nov;26(9):2669-76 - PubMed
  26. Hippocampus. 2010 Jan;20(1):11-8 - PubMed
  27. Neurosci Lett. 1992 Aug 31;143(1-2):237-42 - PubMed
  28. J Neurosci. 2007 May 23;27(21):5787-95 - PubMed
  29. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2003 Jun;3(2):111-9 - PubMed
  30. Behav Neurosci. 2008 Jun;122(3):651-8 - PubMed
  31. J Comp Neurol. 1984 Jun 20;226(2):184-202 - PubMed
  32. J Comp Neurol. 1990 Oct 22;300(4):593-606 - PubMed
  33. Behav Neurosci. 2008 Feb;122(1):89-97 - PubMed
  34. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Sep;11(9):379-86 - PubMed
  35. J Neurophysiol. 1975 Jul;38(4):871-908 - PubMed
  36. Behav Brain Res. 2007 Apr 16;179(1):19-27 - PubMed
  37. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1977 Apr;91(2):407-17 - PubMed
  38. Behav Neurosci. 2004 Dec;118(6):1225-39 - PubMed
  39. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1978 Jul;4(3):286-95 - PubMed
  40. Behav Neurosci. 2007 Feb;121(1):63-79 - PubMed
  41. J Neurosci. 1998 Oct 1;18(19):8038-46 - PubMed
  42. Behav Neurosci. 2006 Aug;120(4):970-5 - PubMed
  43. Neuroreport. 1999 Apr 6;10(5):941-5 - PubMed
  44. J Comp Neurol. 1998 Feb 16;391(3):293-321 - PubMed
  45. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2006 Sep;86(2):205-13 - PubMed
  46. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007;30:123-52 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support