2014
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-1969-7_10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Memory Consolidation, Replay, and Cortico-Hippocampal Interactions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 104 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PFC is the cortical structure most extensively studied in the context of hippocampo-cortical communication (Maingret et al, 2016;Peyrache et al, 2009;Peyrache, Battaglia, & Destexhe, 2011;Siapas and Wilson, 1998;Wierzynski et al, 2009), due to monosynaptic and highly plastic inputs from ventral hippocampus (Laroche, Davis, & Jay, 2000;Swanson et al, 1981), and the hypothesized cooperation with hippocampus on various memory tasks (Doyere et al, 1993;Jones & Wilson, 2005). The extensive connectivity of PFC with hippocampus and the range of cortical/subcortical structures (Fuster, 1988), as well as the selective activation of PFC during remote, but not recent memory retrieval (Maviel, Durkin, Menzaghi, & Bontempi, 2004), suggest that the PFC might gradually take over the hub position in the organization of remote memories, as they are progressively integrated with cortical schemas (Frankland & Bontempi, 2005;Tse et al, 2007;Holleman & Battaglia, 2015). Simultaneous hippocampal-PFC recordings, which typically included infra/prelimbic parts of medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), have shown asymmetric SWR-triggered population activity peri-event time histograms (PETH), with increases from baseline up to 200 ms prior to SWR that persisted for 1-2 s following SWR (Peyrache et al, 2009;Siapas & Wilson, 1998;Wierzynski et al, 2009).…”
Section: Association Corticesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PFC is the cortical structure most extensively studied in the context of hippocampo-cortical communication (Maingret et al, 2016;Peyrache et al, 2009;Peyrache, Battaglia, & Destexhe, 2011;Siapas and Wilson, 1998;Wierzynski et al, 2009), due to monosynaptic and highly plastic inputs from ventral hippocampus (Laroche, Davis, & Jay, 2000;Swanson et al, 1981), and the hypothesized cooperation with hippocampus on various memory tasks (Doyere et al, 1993;Jones & Wilson, 2005). The extensive connectivity of PFC with hippocampus and the range of cortical/subcortical structures (Fuster, 1988), as well as the selective activation of PFC during remote, but not recent memory retrieval (Maviel, Durkin, Menzaghi, & Bontempi, 2004), suggest that the PFC might gradually take over the hub position in the organization of remote memories, as they are progressively integrated with cortical schemas (Frankland & Bontempi, 2005;Tse et al, 2007;Holleman & Battaglia, 2015). Simultaneous hippocampal-PFC recordings, which typically included infra/prelimbic parts of medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), have shown asymmetric SWR-triggered population activity peri-event time histograms (PETH), with increases from baseline up to 200 ms prior to SWR that persisted for 1-2 s following SWR (Peyrache et al, 2009;Siapas & Wilson, 1998;Wierzynski et al, 2009).…”
Section: Association Corticesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, it is highly plausible that task performance leaves a neural trace which manifests as altered propagation of intrinsic activity. In fact, such traces must underlie episodic memory and skill acquisition (Albert et al 2009;Holleman and Battaglia 2015).…”
Section: Resting-state Lag Analysis (Rs-la)mentioning
confidence: 99%