Limits...
Advances in the behavioural testing and network imaging of rodent recognition memory.

Kinnavane L, Albasser MM, Aggleton JP - Behav. Brain Res. (2014)

Bottom Line: The standard task, however, contains a number of inherent shortcomings that reduce its power.In contrast, when familiar objects are explored the pathway from the perirhinal cortex to lateral entorhinal cortex, and then to CA1, takes precedence.The switch to the perforant pathway (novel stimuli) from the temporoammonic pathway (familiar stimuli) may assist the enhanced associative learning promoted by novel stimuli.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, 70 Park Place, Cardiff, Wales CF10 3AT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: kinnavanel@cf.ac.uk.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Bow-tie maze with associated behavioural data. (A) Schematic illustration of the bow-tie maze [67]. A central sliding door separates the two ends of the maze in which two objects are placed. (B) General procedure for the standard running object recognition test showing the presentation order of the objects. All objects are rewarded (+). Arrows show direction of rat movements. Bold letters represent novel objects and grey letters represent familiar objects. (A) and (B) adapted from [68]. (C) Object recognition by rats with perirhinal cortex lesions (black square) and surgical controls (white triangle) [27]; graph shows the updated D2 scores over successive trials. D2 is the time exploring the novel object minus the time exploring the familiar object, divided by total exploration. Scores can range from +1 to −1. (D) Object recognition forgetting curve: Graph shows updated D2 scores of composite object recognition memory performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black square) and their controls (white triangle) across various retention intervals used in separate experiments. (E) Object recency: histogram showing the mean performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black) and their surgical controls (white) on recency discrimination performance. Only the control group performed above chance. In addition, recognition performance is given for the two blocks of stimulus familiarisation trials (SOR1 and SOR2) that incorporate an object recognition test (retention delay 1 min). (D, E) Adapted from [69]. Data shown are mean ± standard error. Group differences ***p < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383364&req=5

fig0010: Bow-tie maze with associated behavioural data. (A) Schematic illustration of the bow-tie maze [67]. A central sliding door separates the two ends of the maze in which two objects are placed. (B) General procedure for the standard running object recognition test showing the presentation order of the objects. All objects are rewarded (+). Arrows show direction of rat movements. Bold letters represent novel objects and grey letters represent familiar objects. (A) and (B) adapted from [68]. (C) Object recognition by rats with perirhinal cortex lesions (black square) and surgical controls (white triangle) [27]; graph shows the updated D2 scores over successive trials. D2 is the time exploring the novel object minus the time exploring the familiar object, divided by total exploration. Scores can range from +1 to −1. (D) Object recognition forgetting curve: Graph shows updated D2 scores of composite object recognition memory performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black square) and their controls (white triangle) across various retention intervals used in separate experiments. (E) Object recency: histogram showing the mean performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black) and their surgical controls (white) on recency discrimination performance. Only the control group performed above chance. In addition, recognition performance is given for the two blocks of stimulus familiarisation trials (SOR1 and SOR2) that incorporate an object recognition test (retention delay 1 min). (D, E) Adapted from [69]. Data shown are mean ± standard error. Group differences ***p < 0.001.

Mentions: There is a need to devise a task that utilises the strongest features of the spontaneous object recognition task while addressing as many of its shortcomings as possible. The ‘bow-tie maze’, introduced by Albasser et al. [67], was designed for this very reason. This task is a hybrid of DNMS and spontaneous object recognition, drawing key elements from both tasks. The central feature is that rodents repeatedly explore pairs of objects at opposite ends of an enclosed maze shaped like a bow-tie. Each pair of stimuli consists of one novel object and one familiar object (Fig. 2A and B). A sliding door in the middle of the maze separates the two ends of the maze, so ensuring discrete trials. This arrangement makes it possible to run multiple trials within a session without handling the rodents. Although the animals have to be pre-trained to run from one end of the maze to the other for food rewards, which adds to the labour involved, this pre-training helps to ensure that the animals are well habituated to the test environment and so reduces stress.


Advances in the behavioural testing and network imaging of rodent recognition memory.

Kinnavane L, Albasser MM, Aggleton JP - Behav. Brain Res. (2014)

Bow-tie maze with associated behavioural data. (A) Schematic illustration of the bow-tie maze [67]. A central sliding door separates the two ends of the maze in which two objects are placed. (B) General procedure for the standard running object recognition test showing the presentation order of the objects. All objects are rewarded (+). Arrows show direction of rat movements. Bold letters represent novel objects and grey letters represent familiar objects. (A) and (B) adapted from [68]. (C) Object recognition by rats with perirhinal cortex lesions (black square) and surgical controls (white triangle) [27]; graph shows the updated D2 scores over successive trials. D2 is the time exploring the novel object minus the time exploring the familiar object, divided by total exploration. Scores can range from +1 to −1. (D) Object recognition forgetting curve: Graph shows updated D2 scores of composite object recognition memory performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black square) and their controls (white triangle) across various retention intervals used in separate experiments. (E) Object recency: histogram showing the mean performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black) and their surgical controls (white) on recency discrimination performance. Only the control group performed above chance. In addition, recognition performance is given for the two blocks of stimulus familiarisation trials (SOR1 and SOR2) that incorporate an object recognition test (retention delay 1 min). (D, E) Adapted from [69]. Data shown are mean ± standard error. Group differences ***p < 0.001.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383364&req=5

fig0010: Bow-tie maze with associated behavioural data. (A) Schematic illustration of the bow-tie maze [67]. A central sliding door separates the two ends of the maze in which two objects are placed. (B) General procedure for the standard running object recognition test showing the presentation order of the objects. All objects are rewarded (+). Arrows show direction of rat movements. Bold letters represent novel objects and grey letters represent familiar objects. (A) and (B) adapted from [68]. (C) Object recognition by rats with perirhinal cortex lesions (black square) and surgical controls (white triangle) [27]; graph shows the updated D2 scores over successive trials. D2 is the time exploring the novel object minus the time exploring the familiar object, divided by total exploration. Scores can range from +1 to −1. (D) Object recognition forgetting curve: Graph shows updated D2 scores of composite object recognition memory performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black square) and their controls (white triangle) across various retention intervals used in separate experiments. (E) Object recency: histogram showing the mean performance of rats with hippocampal lesions (black) and their surgical controls (white) on recency discrimination performance. Only the control group performed above chance. In addition, recognition performance is given for the two blocks of stimulus familiarisation trials (SOR1 and SOR2) that incorporate an object recognition test (retention delay 1 min). (D, E) Adapted from [69]. Data shown are mean ± standard error. Group differences ***p < 0.001.
Mentions: There is a need to devise a task that utilises the strongest features of the spontaneous object recognition task while addressing as many of its shortcomings as possible. The ‘bow-tie maze’, introduced by Albasser et al. [67], was designed for this very reason. This task is a hybrid of DNMS and spontaneous object recognition, drawing key elements from both tasks. The central feature is that rodents repeatedly explore pairs of objects at opposite ends of an enclosed maze shaped like a bow-tie. Each pair of stimuli consists of one novel object and one familiar object (Fig. 2A and B). A sliding door in the middle of the maze separates the two ends of the maze, so ensuring discrete trials. This arrangement makes it possible to run multiple trials within a session without handling the rodents. Although the animals have to be pre-trained to run from one end of the maze to the other for food rewards, which adds to the labour involved, this pre-training helps to ensure that the animals are well habituated to the test environment and so reduces stress.

Bottom Line: The standard task, however, contains a number of inherent shortcomings that reduce its power.In contrast, when familiar objects are explored the pathway from the perirhinal cortex to lateral entorhinal cortex, and then to CA1, takes precedence.The switch to the perforant pathway (novel stimuli) from the temporoammonic pathway (familiar stimuli) may assist the enhanced associative learning promoted by novel stimuli.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, 70 Park Place, Cardiff, Wales CF10 3AT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: kinnavanel@cf.ac.uk.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus