Olfactory bulb differently synchronizes ventral hippocampus–medial prefrontal cortex circuit during spatial working memory across social dominance hierarchies

Elham Bakhshi Jifroudi; Soomaayeh Heysieattalab; Farhad Farkhondeh Tale Navi; Ali Jaafari suha; Faezeh Zarfsaz; Yousef Panahi

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0341166

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 5, 2025
23 Nov 2025 Decision Letter - Dragan Hrncic, Editor Dear Dr. Heysieattalab, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. ============================== ACADEMIC EDITOR: please do follow advices from our reviewers ============================== Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 07 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols . We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Prof. Dr. Dragan Hrncic, MD, PhD Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. To comply with PLOS One submissions requirements, in your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the experiments involving animals and ensure you have included details on (1) methods of sacrifice, (2) methods of anesthesia and/or analgesia, and (3) efforts to alleviate suffering. 3. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. 4. In the online submission form, you indicated that [Data will be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.]. All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval. 5. Please upload a new copy of Figure 1 as the detail is not clear. Please follow the link for more information: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures 6. We notice that your supplementary figure (Figure S1) is uploaded with the file type 'Figure'. Please amend the file type to 'Supporting Information'. Please ensure that each Supporting Information file has a legend listed in the manuscript after the references list. 7. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? Reviewer #1: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??> The PLOS Data policy Reviewer #1: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??> Reviewer #1: Yes ****** Reviewer #1: Very interesting and well-written article that reflects a well-designed and carefully conducted study. It is suitable for publication. The introduction is rather extensive for a scientific article, containing a detailed description of the current knowledge in the field. A significant reduction of the Introduction section is recommended Attention should be given to the quality of the figures. The images in the PDF version of the manuscript appear to have low resolution. Throughout the text, the formatting of statistical values should be standardized. For example, ensure consistency between 'P=0.005' and 'P = 0.005’ Best regards, ****** what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy Reviewer #1: Yes: Jorge Miranda Rodrigues ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation. NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0341166.r001
Revision 1
2 Dec 2025 Author Response Manuscript Number.: PONE-D-25-54057 Olfactory Bulb Differently Synchronizes Ventral Hippocampus–Medial Prefrontal Cortex Circuit During Spatial Working Memory Across Social Dominance Hierarchies Editor and Reviewer comments: We sincerely thank the editor and the reviewer for the time and thoughtful consideration they dedicated to evaluating our manuscript. We have carefully addressed all comments and revised the manuscript accordingly. We believe that the revisions made in response to their constructive feedback have significantly improved the quality and clarity of the work. Below, we provide a point-by-point response to each comment. #Journal Requirements: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf Thank you for these clear guidelines. We have revised the manuscript to fully comply with PLOS ONE's style requirements. All changes are clearly indicated throughout manuscript. 2. To comply with PLOS One submissions requirements, in your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the experiments involving animals and ensure you have included details on (1) methods of sacrifice, (2) methods of anesthesia and/or analgesia, and (3) efforts to alleviate suffering. The Methods section has been updated to include further information on animal procedures, including the method of sacrifice, anesthesia and analgesia protocols, and measures taken to minimize animal distress. These additions are included in the “Electrode Implantation and Histological Verification” subsection. #2.2.2.1. Electrode Implantation and Histological Verification: Anesthesia depth was continuously monitored by assessing tail and paw pinch reflexes. Additionally, vitamin A ointment was applied to the eyes to prevent corneal drying during surgery. Local anesthesia of the scalp was provided by subcutaneous injection of 0.5 ml Persocaine to minimize pain during the incision. After the completion of experiments, to ensure accurate electrode placement, rats were deeply anesthetized with carbon dioxide. Once breathing ceased completely and the animals exhibited ocular pallor, they were rapidly decapitated using a guillotine. Brains were carefully extracted and fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde at 4 °C for 48 h. Subsequently, the brains were sectioned using a vibroslicer, stained with methylene blue, and examined under a microscope (AC 230V 50 Hz, Fig. 1b). 3. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. Thank you for your comment. I would like to inform you that I have now made all the data publicly available in accordance with the journal’s open data policy. #Data availability: The data associated with this research are openly accessible on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform via the following link: https://osf.io/sjex3/?view_only=c0da26cdab6e4141995620a703a016d8 4. In the online submission form, you indicated that [Data will be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.]. All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval. In accordance with PLOS ONE policy, all relevant data have been deposited in the Open Science Framework (OSF) repository and are now publicly accessible. 5. Please upload a new copy of Figure 1 as the detail is not clear. Please follow the link for more information: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures Thank you. A new, high-resolution version of Fig 1 has been uploaded according to the provided figure preparation guidelines. 6. We notice that your supplementary figure (Figure S1) is uploaded with the file type 'Figure'. Please amend the file type to 'Supporting Information'. Please ensure that each Supporting Information file has a legend listed in the manuscript after the references list. Thank you for your helpful comment. We have amended the file type of Figure S1 to “S1_File” and uploaded it as a single ZIP file named “Supporting Information.” In addition, the corresponding legend in the manuscript has been updated as follows: File. Cross-correlation between OB delta and gamma oscillations in mPFC (a–c) and vHPC (d–f) during correct and wrong responses across two levels of task difficulty and different social ranks. (a) Easy level of task (OB–mPFC), (b) Difficult level of task (OB–mPFC; **p < 0.001, Values are expressed as mean ±SEM.), (c) Easy vs. difficult levels of task (OB–mPFC), (d) Easy level of task (OB–vHPC), (e) Difficult level of task (OB–vHPC), (f) Easy vs. difficult levels of task (OB–vHPC). 7. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. Thank you for your guidance. We have prepared a 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes' in which all modifications related to the Supporting Information captions and corresponding in-text citations are clearly highlighted. 8. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice. Thank you for your helpful recommendation. We have carefully reviewed the reference list and confirm that none of the cited articles have been retracted. #Reviewer 1: 1. The introduction is rather extensive for a scientific article, containing a detailed description of the current knowledge in the field. A significant reduction of the Introduction section is recommended Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have carefully revised and shortened the Introduction section. All modifications related to this comment are clearly highlighted in the 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes' for your reference. 2. Attention should be given to the quality of the figures. The images in the PDF version of the manuscript appear to have low resolution. Thank you for your comment. We have replaced all figures with higher-resolution versions to ensure clear visibility in the PDF version of the manuscript. 3. Throughout the text, the formatting of statistical values should be standardized. For example, ensure consistency between 'P=0.005' and 'P = 0.005’ Thank you for your helpful comment. We have standardized the formatting of all statistical values throughout the manuscript. All corresponding edits can be seen in the 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx* https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0341166.r002
4 Jan 2026 Decision Letter - Dragan Hrncic, Editor <p>Olfactory Bulb Differently Synchronizes Ventral Hippocampus–Medial Prefrontal Cortex Circuit During Spatial Working Memory across Social Dominance Hierarchies PONE-D-25-54057R1 Dear Dr. Heysieattalab, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support . If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Prof. Dr. Dragan Hrncic, MD, PhD Academic Editor PLOS One Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0341166.r003
Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Dragan Hrncic, Editor PONE-D-25-54057R1 PLOS One Dear Dr. Heysieattalab, I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS One. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team. At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following: * All references, tables, and figures are properly cited * All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission, * There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps. Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing. If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Professor Dragan Hrncic Academic Editor PLOS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0341166.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .