Literature DB >> 11011105

Rats more readily acquire a time-of-day go no-go discrimination than a time-of-day choice discrimination.

.   

Abstract

Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used to compare six time-place training procedures that differed with respect to housing or training conditions. All procedures involved training food-deprived rats to enter one choice arm of a T-maze during a morning test session and to enter the other choice arm during an afternoon session to obtain Cocoa Puffs(R). The task proved to be difficult. Only 39 of 49 rats attained a criterion of nine correct choices on ten consecutive trials within a total of 120 trials. Making one choice arm distinct, limiting consecutive same correct choices to two, giving one session during the light and one during the dark portion of the light cycle, extinguishing perseveration of the same choice responses, and housing the rats with a natural light cycle all failed to significantly decrease the errors or trials to a 90% correct choice criterion. In contrast, all responding rats (n=7) showed significantly better than chance performance within 48 trials when the task was a go no-go discrimination based on time of day. Learning to make a response during a session when a choice to either choice arm is reinforced and to withhold responding during a session when a choice to neither choice arm is reinforced was relatively easy for the rats to acquire. Continued high level performance after the light cycle was eliminated, a random feeding schedule was initiated, and other time-related cues were masked suggests that the rats used internal cues or an internal clock to make the correct go or no-go response. It was concluded that rats are prepared to use time of day as an occasion-setting stimulus, but have difficulty using time of day as a signal for a specific response.

Entities:  

Year:  2000        PMID: 11011105     DOI: 10.1016/s0376-6357(00)00109-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  9 in total

1.  Simultaneous temporal and spatial processing.

Authors:  Jonathon D Crystal; Benjamin J Miller
Journal:  Anim Learn Behav       Date:  2002-02

2.  The effects of response cost and species-typical behaviors on a daily time-place learning task.

Authors:  Scott H Deibel; Christina M Thorpe
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Rats in a levered T-maze task show evidence of time-place discriminations in two different measures.

Authors:  Scott H Deibel; Andrew B Lehr; Chelsea Maloney; Matthew L Ingram; Leanna M Lewis; Anne-Marie P Chaulk; Pam D Chaulk; Darlene M Skinner; Christina M Thorpe
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Distance and direction, but not light cues, support response reversal learning.

Authors:  S L Wright; G M Martin; C M Thorpe; K Haley; D M Skinner
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.986

Review 5.  Occasion setting.

Authors:  Kurt M Fraser; Peter C Holland
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.912

6.  Configural integration of temporal and contextual information in rats: Automated measurement in appetitive and aversive preparations.

Authors:  Natasha M Dumigan; Tzu-Ching E Lin; Mark Good; Robert C Honey
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Rats acquire a low-response-cost daily time-place task with differential amounts of food.

Authors:  Christina M Thorpe; Donald M Wilkie
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  In a daily time-place learning task, time is only used as a discriminative stimulus if each daily session is associated with a distinct spatial location.

Authors:  Scott H Deibel; Matthew L Ingram; Andrew B Lehr; Hiliary C Martin; Darlene M Skinner; Gerard M Martin; Isaac M W Hughes; Christina M Thorpe
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.926

9.  Translational Difficulties in Querying Rats on "Orientation".

Authors:  Aliz Judit Ernyey; Eszter Bögi; Ferenc Kassai; Imola Plangár; István Gyertyán
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.