2021
DOI: 10.1038/s41596-021-00627-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The spontaneous location recognition task for assessing spatial pattern separation and memory across a delay in rats and mice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the two studies also differed in the strain of rats used: Hunsaker and Kesner (2008) used Long Evans rats and we used Wistar strain, which could also contribute to the observed variability (Andrews et al, 1995). Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first time in which the successful discrimination of displaced objects was associated with high but not low spatial displacements in rats (but see also Reichelt et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In addition, the two studies also differed in the strain of rats used: Hunsaker and Kesner (2008) used Long Evans rats and we used Wistar strain, which could also contribute to the observed variability (Andrews et al, 1995). Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first time in which the successful discrimination of displaced objects was associated with high but not low spatial displacements in rats (but see also Reichelt et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Alternatively, this could be tested with a behavioral pattern separation task that can be performed over a few days (spontaneous location recognition or object lure discrimination and mnemonic discrimination testing) rather than a month (the present work). Using a more condensed behavioral pattern separation task would also enable future dissociation of the stages of learning (encoding, consolidation, and retrieval) and factors that regulate each stage (Bekinschtein et al, 2013;Johnson et al, 2018;Morales et al, 2021;Reichelt et al, 2021). (Yassa et al, 2010;Stone et al, 2011;Wilson et al, 2013;Hansen et al, 2018;Yun et al, 2018b;Amani et al, 2021), antidepressant-like behavior (Yun et al, 2018a), and reward-seeking (Ge et al, 2017) (Schultz, 1997;Ungless et al, 2010;Morikawa and Paladini, 2011;Marinelli and McCutcheon, 2014;Keiflin and Janak, 2015;Wise and Jordan, 2021), and S%&$%&3!2"##&3&/$!-.967!+3!-.9%"44+('F4'0!("3(:"$1!'3&!&/<'<&2!:/2&3!…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly to the smart-Kage clustering above, these thresholds were selected to assign a maximum number of control animals into a single ‘control’ cluster. Animals with T-maze performance below 70%; the absolute value of NOR d2 ratio 29 below 0.04 and the absolute value of OPR d2 ratio below 0.06 were identified as displaying cognitive decline. In brief, d2 ratio is the difference in exploration time between the novel and familiar object, normalized with regard to their combined exploration time.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%