Schematic memory components converge within angular gyrus during retrieval

  1. Isabella C Wagner  Is a corresponding author
  2. Mariët van Buuren
  3. Marijn CW Kroes
  4. Tjerk P Gutteling
  5. Marieke van der Linden
  6. Richard G Morris
  7. Guillén Fernández
  1. Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands
  2. University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Abstract

Mental schemas form associative knowledge structures that can promote the encoding and consolidation of new and related information. Schemas are facilitated by a distributed system that stores components separately, presumably in the form of inter-connected neocortical representations. During retrieval, these components need to be recombined into one representation, but where exactly such recombination takes place is unclear. Thus, we asked where different schema components are neuronally represented and converge during retrieval. Subjects acquired and retrieved two well-controlled, rule-based schema structures during fMRI on consecutive days. Schema retrieval was associated with midline, medial-temporal, and parietal processing. We identified the multi-voxel representations of different schema components, which converged within the angular gyrus during retrieval. Critically, convergence only happened after 24-hour-consolidation and during a transfer test where schema material was applied to novel but related trials. Therefore, the angular gyrus appears to recombine consolidated schema components into one memory representation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Isabella C Wagner

    Radboudumc, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    i.wagner@donders.ru.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mariët van Buuren

    Radboudumc, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Marijn CW Kroes

    Nijmegen, Radboud University Nijmegen, New York, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Tjerk P Gutteling

    Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Marieke van der Linden

    Radboudumc, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Richard G Morris

    Centre for Cognitive and Neural Systems, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Guillén Fernández

    Radboudumc, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Human subjects: All subjects gave written informed consent prior to participation. The study was conducted according to protocol approved by the institutional review board (CMO Region Arnhem-Nijmegen, The Netherlands).

Copyright

© 2015, Wagner et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,333
    views
  • 570
    downloads
  • 73
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Isabella C Wagner
  2. Mariët van Buuren
  3. Marijn CW Kroes
  4. Tjerk P Gutteling
  5. Marieke van der Linden
  6. Richard G Morris
  7. Guillén Fernández
(2015)
Schematic memory components converge within angular gyrus during retrieval
eLife 4:e09668.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09668

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09668

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sisi Wang, Freek van Ede
    Research Article

    A classic distinction from the domain of external attention is that between anticipatory orienting and subsequent re-orienting of attention to unexpected events. Whether and how humans also re-orient attention ‘in mind’ following expected and unexpected working-memory tests remains elusive. We leveraged spatial modulations in neural activity and gaze to isolate re-orienting within the spatial layout of visual working memory following central memory tests of certain, expected, or unexpected mnemonic content. Besides internal orienting after predictive cues, we unveil a second stage of internal attentional deployment following both expected and unexpected memory tests. Following expected tests, internal attentional deployment was not contingent on prior orienting, suggesting an additional verification – ‘double checking’ – in memory. Following unexpected tests, re-focusing of alternative memory content was prolonged. This brings attentional re-orienting to the domain of working memory and underscores how memory tests can invoke either a verification or a revision of our internal focus.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.