title: Perirhinal cortex removal dissociates two memory systems in matching-to-sample performance in rhesus monkeys.
abstract: Dissociations of memory systems are typically made using independent cognitive tests. For example, in monkeys habits have been inferred from performance in object discrimination tests, while non-matching-to-sample tests are thought to measure familiarity resulting from single exposures. Such tests cannot measure individual memory processes accurately when more than one memory process contributes to performance. In process dissociation procedures (PDPs), two memory processes cooperate and compete in the performance of a single cognitive task, allowing quantitative estimates of the contributions of each process. We used PDP to measure the contributions of habits and one-trial memory to visual matching-to-sample performance. Sets of test images were shown only once in each daily testing session but were repeated day after day. To produce habits, high-frequency images were correct more frequently than other images across days. Habits were manifest in the extent to which choices in the test phase of matching-to-sample trials were made to the high-frequency images, regardless of which image had been presented as the sample. One-trial memory was measured by the extent to which choices at test were made to the image that had appeared as the sample on that trial, regardless of habit. Perirhinal cortex removal reduced the contribution of one-trial memory to matching performance, but left both habits and the ability to discriminate images intact. PDP can be applied in monkeys in a way that parallels its use in humans, providing a new tool for investigating the neurobiology of memory in nonhuman animals and for comparing memory across species.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology and Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA. hsiaowei.tu@emory.edu
authors.forename: Hsiao-Wei
authors.initials: HW
authors.lastname: Tu
authors.forename: Robert R
authors.initials: RR
authors.lastname: Hampton
authors.forename: Elisabeth A
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Murray
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D000818:Animals; D001522:Behavior, Animal; D015982:Bias; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003714:Denervation; D004193:Discrimination Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D018728:Entorhinal Cortex / Q000293:injuries* / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006184:Habits; D008253:Macaca mulatta; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011336:Probability; D011897:Random Allocation; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Science. 1991 Sep 20;253(5026):1380-6
references.pmid: 1896849
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2011 Apr;39(3):389-402
references.pmid: 21264598
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2010 May;14(5):195-200
references.pmid: 20227327
references.citation: Neuron. 2009 Mar 12;61(5):667-77
references.pmid: 19285463
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1984 Oct;98(5):759-69
references.pmid: 6487412
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1999 Dec;113(6):1127-51
references.pmid: 10636294
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1995 May;21(3):531-47
references.pmid: 7602260
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Apr 24;98(9):5359-62
references.pmid: 11274360
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 1993;44:453-95
references.pmid: 8434894
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2007 Jan;18(1):64-71
references.pmid: 17362380
references.citation: Eur J Neurosci. 2002 Jan;15(2):365-74
references.pmid: 11849302
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1994 Mar;20(2):290-303
references.pmid: 8151274
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1998 Feb;112(1):3-14
references.pmid: 9517811
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1997 Jun;111(3):467-75
references.pmid: 9189261
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 1999 Nov;37(12):1375-86
references.pmid: 10606012
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1993 Dec;13(12):5418-32
references.pmid: 8254384
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1994 Apr;14(4):2128-39
references.pmid: 8158261
references.citation: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1990;608:457-77; discussion 477-84
references.pmid: 2127516
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Nov;22(6):1323-35
references.pmid: 8921600
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jul;11(7):523-32
references.pmid: 20531422
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 2002 Jun;116(3):363-77
references.pmid: 12049317
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Sep;13(9):389-96
references.pmid: 19726218
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1998 Sep;127(3):227-50
references.pmid: 9742715
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1949 Jan;56(1):51-65
references.pmid: 18124807
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2010 Jul;48(8):2385-405
references.pmid: 20097215
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1997 Nov 1;17(21):8536-49
references.pmid: 9334426
references.citation: Science. 1990 Jan 19;247(4940):301-6
references.pmid: 2296719
references.citation: Comp Cogn Behav Rev. 2009 Jan 1;4:17-28
references.pmid: 20046911
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2000 Dec;3(12):1307-15
references.pmid: 11100152
references.citation: Learn Mem. 1999 Nov-Dec;6(6):572-99
references.pmid: 10641763
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1992 Feb;106(1):30-8
references.pmid: 1554436
references.citation: Hippocampus. 2001;11(4):361-70
references.pmid: 11530840
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1998 Mar 15;18(6):2268-75
references.pmid: 9482811
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Mar 27;98(7):4196-201
references.pmid: 11274442
references.citation: Behav Neurosci. 1988 Apr;102(2):210-21
references.pmid: 3130073