Architecture of spatial circuits in the hippocampal region

Witter, Menno P.; Canto, Cathrin B.; Couey, Jonathan J.; Koganezawa, Noriko; O’Reilly, Kally C.

doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0515

Cited by 48 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 89 publications

(121 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…to prefrontal cortex). However, the presence of bidirectional and re-entrant pathways, and projections influencing both superficial and deep entorhinal layers, means that it is not entirely straightforward to define pure 'input' and 'output' pathways or feed-forward hierarchical structure (see [20] for further discussion). An important anatomical feature that the schematic figure 1 does not emphasize is the substantial projection of CA3 pyramidal cells to other CA3 pyramidal cells.…”

Section: Anatomy and Spatial Cells Of The Hippocampal Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Space in the brain: how the hippocampal formation supports spatial cognition

Hartley

Lever

Burgess

et al. 2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

423

354

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past four decades, research has revealed that cells in the hippocampal formation provide an exquisitely detailed representation of an animal's current location and heading. These findings have provided the foundations for a growing understanding of the mechanisms of spatial cognition in mammals, including humans. We describe the key properties of the major categories of spatial cells: place cells, head direction cells, grid cells and boundary cells, each of which has a characteristic firing pattern that encodes spatial parameters relating to the animal's current position and orientation. These properties also include the theta oscillation, which appears to play a functional role in the representation and processing of spatial information. Reviewing recent work, we identify some themes of current research and introduce approaches to computational modelling that have helped to bridge the different levels of description at which these mechanisms have been investigated. These range from the level of molecular biology and genetics to the behaviour and brain activity of entire organisms. We argue that the neuroscience of spatial cognition is emerging as an exceptionally integrative field which provides an ideal test-bed for theories linking neural coding, learning, memory and cognition.

show abstract

Section: Anatomy and Spatial Cells Of The Hippocampal Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Space in the brain: how the hippocampal formation supports spatial cognition

Hartley

Lever

Burgess

et al. 2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

423

354

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, as emphasized by Witter et al [47], there are feedback pathways from the hippocampus to the MEC and LEC and from the MEC and LEC to the neocortex. Because the hippocampus combines the two streams in the dentate gyrus (DG) and CA3, the MEC and LEC may each show spatial and nonspatial processing based on this combined feedback signal.…”

Section: Anatomy Supports the Interconnectivity Of The Two Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional correlates of the lateral and medial entorhinal cortex: objects, path integration and local–global reference frames

Knierim

Neunuebel

Deshmukh

2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

376

357

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hippocampus receives its major cortical input from the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) and the lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC). It is commonly believed that the MEC provides spatial input to the hippocampus, whereas the LEC provides non-spatial input. We review new data which suggest that this simple dichotomy between ‘where’ versus ‘what’ needs revision. We propose a refinement of this model, which is more complex than the simple spatial–non-spatial dichotomy. MEC is proposed to be involved in path integration computations based on a global frame of reference, primarily using internally generated, self-motion cues and external input about environmental boundaries and scenes; it provides the hippocampus with a coordinate system that underlies the spatial context of an experience. LEC is proposed to process information about individual items and locations based on a local frame of reference, primarily using external sensory input; it provides the hippocampus with information about the content of an experience.

show abstract

“…The entorhinal cortex (ERC) is situated medially to the PRC and extends superiorly to the hippocampal fissure, abutting the presubiculum and parasubiculum (Insausti et al, ). Rodent research has highlighted a key distinction between the lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC) and the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) subregions, which are bidirectionally connected with the perirhinal and postrhinal cortices, respectively, and differentially project to hippocampal subregions (Burwell, ; Canto, Wouterlood, & Witter, ; Knierim, Neunuebel, & Deshmukh, ; van Strien, Cappaert, & Witter, ; Witter, Canto, Couey, Koganezawa, & O'Reilly, ). The MEC has been selectively associated with encoding spatial information and the presence of grid cells, while the LEC has been associated with item memory, or forming links between items and spatial contexts (Fyhn, ; Hafting, Fyhn, Molden, Moser, & Moser, ; Hargreaves, Rao, Lee, & Knierim, ; Pilkiw et al, ; Yoo & Lee, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Category specificity in the medial temporal lobe: A systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretical accounts of medial temporal lobe (MTL) function ascribe different functions to subregions of the MTL including perirhinal, entorhinal, parahippocampal cortices and the hippocampus. Some have suggested that the functional roles of these subregions vary in terms of their category specificity, showing preferential coding for certain stimulus types, but the evidence for this functional organization is mixed. In this systematic review, we evaluate existing evidence for regional specialization in the MTL for three categories of visual stimuli: faces, objects and scenes. We review and synthesize across univariate and multivariate neuroimaging studies, as well as neuropsychological studies of cases with lesions to the MTL. Neuroimaging evidence suggests that faces activate the perirhinal cortex, entorhinal cortex and the anterior hippocampus, while scenes engage the parahippocampal cortex and both the anterior and posterior hippocampus, depending on the contrast condition. There is some evidence for object-related activity in anterior MTL regions when compared to scenes, and in posterior MTL regions when compared to faces, suggesting that aspects of object representations may share similarities with face and scene representations. While neuroimaging evidence suggests some hippocampal specialization for faces and scenes, neuropsychological evidence shows that hippocampal damage leads to impairments in scene memory and perception, but does not entail equivalent impairments for faces in cases where the perirhinal cortex remains intact. Regional specialization based on stimulus categories has implications for understanding the mechanisms of MTL subregions, and highlights the need for the development of theoretical models of MTL function that can accommodate the differential patterns of specificity observed in the MTL. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Architecture of spatial circuits in the hippocampal region

Cited by 48 publications

References 89 publications

Space in the brain: how the hippocampal formation supports spatial cognition

Space in the brain: how the hippocampal formation supports spatial cognition

Functional correlates of the lateral and medial entorhinal cortex: objects, path integration and local–global reference frames

Category specificity in the medial temporal lobe: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About