Memory formation is known to be critically dependent upon the medial temporal lobe (MTL). Despite this well-characterized role, it remains unclear whether and how MTL encoding processes are affected by top-down goal states. Here, we examined the manner in which task demands at encoding affect MTL activity and its relation to subsequent memory performance. Participants were scanned using high-resolution neuroimaging of the MTL while engaging in two incidental encoding tasks: one that directed participants' attention to stimulus distinctiveness, and the other requiring evaluation of similarities across stimuli. We hypothesized that attending to distinctiveness would lead to the formation of more detailed memories and would more effectively engage the hippocampal circuit than attending to similarity. In line with our hypotheses, higher rates of subsequent recollection were observed for stimuli studied under the Distinctiveness than Similarity task. Critically, within the hippocampus, CA1 and the subiculum demonstrated an interaction between memory performance and task such that a significant subsequent memory effect was found only when task goals required attention to stimulus distinctiveness. To this end, robust engagement of the hippocampal circuit may underlie the observed behavioral benefits of attending to distinctiveness. Taken together, these findings advance understanding of the effects of top-down intentional information on successful memory formation across subregions of the MTL.

Episodic memory is vulnerable to age-related change, with older adults demonstrating both impairments in retrieving contextual details and susceptibility to interference among similar events. Such impairments may be due in part to an age-related decline in the ability to encode distinct memory representations. Recent research has examined how manipulating stimulus properties to emphasize distinctiveness can reduce age-related deficits in memory. However, few studies have addressed whether learning strategies that differentially encourage distinctiveness processing attenuate age-related differences in episodic memory. In the present study, participants engaged in two incidental encoding tasks emphasizing either distinctiveness or similarity processing. Results demonstrated higher rates of recollection for stimuli studied under the distinctiveness task than the similarity task in younger but not older adults. These findings suggest a declining capacity for distinctiveness processing to benefit memory in older adults, and raise the possibility that strategies that enhance gist-based encoding may attenuate age-related memory deficits.

Spurred by availability of automatic segmentation software, in vivo MRI investigations of human hippocampal subfield volumes have proliferated in the recent years. However, a majority of these studies apply automatic segmentation to MRI scans with approximately 1 × 1 × 1 mm³ resolution, a resolution at which the internal structure of the hippocampus can rarely be visualized. Many of these studies have reported contradictory and often neurobiologically surprising results pertaining to the involvement of hippocampal subfields in normal brain function, aging, and disease. In this commentary, we first outline our concerns regarding the utility and validity of subfield segmentation on 1 × 1 × 1 mm³ MRI for volumetric studies, regardless of how images are segmented (i.e., manually or automatically). This image resolution is generally insufficient for visualizing the internal structure of the hippocampus, particularly the stratum radiatum lacunosum moleculare, which is crucial for valid and reliable subfield segmentation. Second, we discuss the fact that automatic methods that are employed most frequently to obtain hippocampal subfield volumes from 1 × 1 × 1 mm³ MRI have not been validated against manual segmentation on such images. For these reasons, we caution against using volumetric measurements of hippocampal subfields obtained from 1 × 1 × 1 mm³ images.

Inquiries into properties of brain structure and function have progressed due to developments in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). To sustain progress in investigating and quantifying neuroanatomical details in vivo, the reliability and validity of brain measurements are paramount. Quality control (QC) is a set of procedures for mitigating errors and ensuring the validity and reliability of brain measurements. Despite its importance, there is little guidance on best QC practices and reporting procedures. The study of hippocampal subfields in vivo is a critical case for QC because of their small size, inter-dependent boundary definitions, and common artifacts in the MRI data used for subfield measurements. We addressed this gap by surveying the broader scientific community studying hippocampal subfields on their views and approaches to QC. We received responses from 37 investigators spanning 10 countries, covering different career stages, and studying both healthy and pathological development and aging. In this sample, 81% of researchers considered QC to be very important or important, and 19% viewed it as fairly important. Despite this, only 46% of researchers reported on their QC processes in prior publications. In many instances, lack of reporting appeared due to ambiguous guidance on relevant details and guidance for reporting, rather than absence of QC. Here, we provide recommendations for correcting errors to maximize reliability and minimize bias. We also summarize threats to segmentation accuracy, review common QC methods, and make recommendations for best practices and reporting in publications. Implementing the recommended QC practices will collectively improve inferences to the larger population, as well as have implications for clinical practice and public health.

The advent of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has enabled in vivo research in a variety of populations and diseases on the structure and function of hippocampal subfields and subdivisions of the parahippocampal gyrus. Because of the many extant and highly discrepant segmentation protocols, comparing results across studies is difficult. To overcome this barrier, the Hippocampal Subfields Group was formed as an international collaboration with the aim of developing a harmonized protocol for manual segmentation of hippocampal and parahippocampal subregions on high-resolution MRI. In this commentary we discuss the goals for this protocol and the associated key challenges involved in its development. These include differences among existing anatomical reference materials, striking the right balance between reliability of measurements and anatomical validity, and the development of a versatile protocol that can be adopted for the study of populations varying in age and health. The commentary outlines these key challenges, as well as the proposed solution of each, with concrete examples from our working plan. Finally, with two examples, we illustrate how the harmonized protocol, once completed, is expected to impact the field by producing measurements that are quantitatively comparable across labs and by facilitating the synthesis of findings across different studies. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Introduction

Heterogeneity of segmentation protocols for medial temporal lobe regions and hippocampal subfields on in vivo magnetic resonance imaging hinders the ability to integrate findings across studies. We aim to develop a harmonized protocol based on expert consensus and histological evidence.

Methods

Our international working group, funded by the EU Joint Programme-Neurodegenerative Disease Research (JPND), is working toward the production of a reliable, validated, harmonized protocol for segmentation of medial temporal lobe regions. The working group uses a novel postmortem data set and online consensus procedures to ensure validity and facilitate adoption.

Results

This progress report describes the initial results and milestones that we have achieved to date, including the development of a draft protocol and results from the initial reliability tests and consensus procedures.

Discussion

A harmonized protocol will enable the standardization of segmentation methods across laboratories interested in medial temporal lobe research worldwide.

Objective

An increasing number of human in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have focused on examining the structure and function of the subfields of the hippocampal formation (the dentate gyrus, CA fields 1-3, and the subiculum) and subregions of the parahippocampal gyrus (entorhinal, perirhinal, and parahippocampal cortices). The ability to interpret the results of such studies and to relate them to each other would be improved if a common standard existed for labeling hippocampal subfields and parahippocampal subregions. Currently, research groups label different subsets of structures and use different rules, landmarks, and cues to define their anatomical extents. This paper characterizes, both qualitatively and quantitatively, the variability in the existing manual segmentation protocols for labeling hippocampal and parahippocampal substructures in MRI, with the goal of guiding subsequent work on developing a harmonized substructure segmentation protocol.

Method

MRI scans of a single healthy adult human subject were acquired both at 3 T and 7 T. Representatives from 21 research groups applied their respective manual segmentation protocols to the MRI modalities of their choice. The resulting set of 21 segmentations was analyzed in a common anatomical space to quantify similarity and identify areas of agreement.

Results

The differences between the 21 protocols include the region within which segmentation is performed, the set of anatomical labels used, and the extents of specific anatomical labels. The greatest overall disagreement among the protocols is at the CA1/subiculum boundary, and disagreement across all structures is greatest in the anterior portion of the hippocampal formation relative to the body and tail.

Conclusions

The combined examination of the 21 protocols in the same dataset suggests possible strategies towards developing a harmonized subfield segmentation protocol and facilitates comparison between published studies.