Cerebral Cortex Advance Access published online on April 27, 2004
Cerebral Cortex, doi:10.1093/cercor/bhh050
© 2004 by Oxford University Press
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Wellcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK; Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ksakai{at}m.u-tokyo.ac.jp.
Both the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and medial temporal lobe (MTL) are involved in memory retrieval. Here we distinguish between their roles by manipulating demand for interference resolution and reactivation of maintained information. Subjects were tested on a letter working memory task with distractors. When the memory delay was interrupted with letter distractors, there was higher activity in the middle frontal gyrus at retrieval compared to when the delay was interrupted by number distractors, suggesting the role of the PFC in interference resolution. By contrast, activity in the parahippocampal gyrus did not differ between the two conditions. The two structures were then compared using the dataset of our previous study on memory reactivation, where subjects performed a letter working memory task with arithmetic distractors or non-distractors. The activity in the parahippocampal gyrus at retrieval was higher when distractors interrupted rehearsal than when the intervening task was non-distracting and subjects continued to rehearse, suggesting the role of the MTL in reactivating the stored information. By contrast, the activity in the middle frontal gyrus did not differ between the two conditions. Taking these results together, we have shown the double dissociation between the PFC and MTL in memory retrieval. Key Words:
functional MRI, interference, parahippocampal gyrus, prefrontal cortex, working memory
Article
Prefrontal Selection and Medial Temporal Lobe Reactivation in Retrieval of Short-term Verbal Information
2 Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan; Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3UD, UK
Abstract 
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. Koch, C. Schachtzabel, G. Wagner, J. R. Reichenbach, H. Sauer, and R. Schlosser The neural correlates of reward-related trial-and-error learning: An fMRI study with a probabilistic learning task Learn. Mem., October 2, 2008; 15(10): 728 - 732. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Rissman, A. Gazzaley, and M. D'Esposito Dynamic Adjustments in Prefrontal, Hippocampal, and Inferior Temporal Interactions with Increasing Visual Working Memory Load Cereb Cortex, July 1, 2008; 18(7): 1618 - 1629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. T. Wehner, S. P. Ahlfors, and M. Mody The Influence of Semantic Processing on Phonological Decisions in Children and Adults: A Magnetoencephalography (MEG) Study J Speech Lang Hear Res, June 1, 2007; 50(3): 716 - 731. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Sakai and R. E. Passingham Prefrontal Set Activity Predicts Rule-Specific Neural Processing during Subsequent Cognitive Performance J. Neurosci., January 25, 2006; 26(4): 1211 - 1218. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|