Literature DB >> 18612068

The touchscreen cognitive testing method for rodents: how to get the best out of your rat.

Timothy J Bussey1, Tina L Padain, Elizabeth A Skillings, Boyer D Winters, A Jennifer Morton, Lisa M Saksida.   

Abstract

The touchscreen testing method for rodents is a computer-automated behavioral testing method that allows computer graphic stimuli to be presented to rodents and the rodents to respond to the computer screen via a nose-poke directly to the stimulus. The advantages of this method are numerous; however, a systematic study of the parameters that affect learning has not yet been conducted. We therefore sought to optimize stimuli and task parameters in this method. We found that when parameters were optimized, Lister Hooded rats could learn rapidly using this method, solving a discrimination of two-dimensional stimuli to a level of 80% within five to six sessions lasting approximately 30 min each. In a final experiment we tested both male and female rats of the albino Sprague-Dawley strain, which are often assumed to have visual abilities far too poor to be useful for studies of visual cognition. The performance of female Sprague-Dawley rats was indistinguishable from that of their male counterparts. Furthermore, performance of male Sprague-Dawley rats was indistinguishable from that of their Lister Hooded counterparts. Finally, Experiment 5 examined the ability of Lister Hooded rats to learn a discrimination between photographic stimuli. Under conditions in which parameters were optimized, rats were remarkably adept at this discrimination. Taken together, these experiments served to optimize the touchscreen method and have demonstrated its usefulness as a high-throughput method for the cognitive testing of rodents.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18612068      PMCID: PMC2505319          DOI: 10.1101/lm.987808

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Mem        ISSN: 1072-0502            Impact factor:   2.460


  24 in total

1.  Effects of selective thalamic and prelimbic cortex lesions on two types of visual discrimination and reversal learning.

Authors:  Y Chudasama; T J Bussey; J L Muir
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.386

2.  Impairments in visual discrimination after perirhinal cortex lesions: testing 'declarative' vs. 'perceptual-mnemonic' views of perirhinal cortex function.

Authors:  Timothy J Bussey; Lisa M Saksida; Elisabeth A Murray
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.386

Review 3.  Memory processing by the limbic system: role of specific neurotransmitter systems.

Authors:  I Izquierdo; J H Medina; M Bianchin; R Walz; M S Zanatta; R C Da Silva; M Bueno e Silva; A C Ruschel; N Paczko
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1993-12-20       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Variation in visual acuity within pigmented, and between pigmented and albino rat strains.

Authors:  Glen T Prusky; K Troy Harker; Robert M Douglas; Ian Q Whishaw
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2002-11-15       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Discrimination of computer-graphic stimuli by mice: a method for the behavioral characterization of transgenic and gene-knockout models.

Authors:  T J Bussey; L M Saksida; L A Rothblat
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.912

6.  Perirhinal cortex and place-object conditional learning in the rat.

Authors:  T J Bussey; R Dias; E Amin; J L Muir; J P Aggleton
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.912

7.  Touchscreen-enhanced visual learning in rats.

Authors:  Robert G Cook; Alfred I Geller; Guo-Rong Zhang; Ram Gowda
Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput       Date:  2004-02

8.  Dissociable contributions of the orbitofrontal and infralimbic cortex to pavlovian autoshaping and discrimination reversal learning: further evidence for the functional heterogeneity of the rodent frontal cortex.

Authors:  Y Chudasama; Trevor W Robbins
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-09-24       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Transfer effects and conditional learning in rats with selective lesions of medial septal/diagonal band cholinergic neurons.

Authors:  Agnieszka M Janisiewicz; Mark G Baxter
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.912

10.  Nucleus accumbens dopamine depletion impairs both acquisition and performance of appetitive Pavlovian approach behaviour: implications for mesoaccumbens dopamine function.

Authors:  J A Parkinson; J W Dalley; R N Cardinal; A Bamford; B Fehnert; G Lachenal; N Rudarakanchana; K M Halkerston; T W Robbins; B J Everitt
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2002-12-02       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  88 in total

1.  A rodent model for the study of invariant visual object recognition.

Authors:  Davide Zoccolan; Nadja Oertelt; James J DiCarlo; David D Cox
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-05-08       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Visual discrimination learning in the fire-bellied toad Bombina orientalis.

Authors:  Sarah E M Jenkin; Frédéric Laberge
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Cross-site strain comparison of pharmacological deficits in the touchscreen visual discrimination test.

Authors:  Eric G Mohler; Zhiyong Ding; Lynne E Rueter; Douglas Chapin; Damon Young; Rouba Kozak
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 4.  The NEWMEDS rodent touchscreen test battery for cognition relevant to schizophrenia.

Authors:  M Hvoslef-Eide; A C Mar; S R O Nilsson; J Alsiö; C J Heath; L M Saksida; T W Robbins; T J Bussey
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Role for the M1 Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor in Top-Down Cognitive Processing Using a Touchscreen Visual Discrimination Task in Mice.

Authors:  R W Gould; D Dencker; M Grannan; M Bubser; X Zhan; J Wess; Z Xiang; C Locuson; C W Lindsley; P J Conn; C K Jones
Journal:  ACS Chem Neurosci       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 4.418

Review 6.  A preclinical cognitive test battery to parallel the National Institute of Health Toolbox in humans: bridging the translational gap.

Authors:  Shikha Snigdha; Norton W Milgram; Sherry L Willis; Marylin Albert; S Weintraub; Norbert J Fortin; Carl W Cotman
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 4.673

Review 7.  Drug development for neurodevelopmental disorders: lessons learned from fragile X syndrome.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Berry-Kravis; Lothar Lindemann; Aia E Jønch; George Apostol; Mark F Bear; Randall L Carpenter; Jacqueline N Crawley; Aurore Curie; Vincent Des Portes; Farah Hossain; Fabrizio Gasparini; Baltazar Gomez-Mancilla; David Hessl; Eva Loth; Sebastian H Scharf; Paul P Wang; Florian Von Raison; Randi Hagerman; Will Spooren; Sébastien Jacquemont
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 8.  Inflammatory profiles in the BTBR mouse: how relevant are they to autism spectrum disorders?

Authors:  Milo Careaga; Jared Schwartzer; Paul Ashwood
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 7.217

9.  Predictably irrational: assaying cognitive inflexibility in mouse models of schizophrenia.

Authors:  Jonathan L Brigman; Carolyn Graybeal; Andrew Holmes
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2010-05-15       Impact factor: 4.677

10.  Cognitive abilities on transitive inference using a novel touchscreen technology for mice.

Authors:  J L Silverman; P T Gastrell; M N Karras; M Solomon; J N Crawley
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2013-11-28       Impact factor: 5.357

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.