Blake A Hutsell1, Matthew L Banks2. 1. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. 2. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA; Institute for Drug and Alcohol Abuse Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. Electronic address: mbanks7@vcu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Working memory is a domain of 'executive function.' Delayed nonmatching-to-sample (DNMTS) procedures are commonly used to examine working memory in both human laboratory and preclinical studies. NEW METHOD: The aim was to develop an automated DNMTS procedure maintained by food pellets in rhesus monkeys using a touch-sensitive screen attached to the housing chamber. Specifically, the DNMTS procedure was a 2-stimulus, 2-choice recognition memory task employing unidimensional discriminative stimuli and randomized delay interval presentations. RESULTS: DNMTS maintained a delay-dependent decrease in discriminability that was independent of the retention interval distribution. Eliminating reinforcer availability during a single delay session or providing food pellets before the session did not systematically alter accuracy, but did reduce total choices. Increasing the intertrial interval enhanced accuracy at short delays. Acute Δ(9)-THC pretreatment produced delay interval-dependent changes in the forgetting function at doses that did not alter total choices. Acute methylphenidate pretreatment only decreased total choices. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: All monkeys were trained to perform NMTS at the 1s training delay within 60 days of initiating operant touch training. Furthermore, forgetting functions were reliably delay interval-dependent and stable over the experimental period (∼6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies, increasing the intertrial interval improved DNMTS performance, whereas Δ(9)-THC disrupted DNMTS performance independent of changes in total choices. Overall, the touchscreen-based DNMTS procedure described provides an efficient method for training and testing experimental manipulations on working memory in unrestrained rhesus monkeys.
BACKGROUND:Working memory is a domain of 'executive function.' Delayed nonmatching-to-sample (DNMTS) procedures are commonly used to examine working memory in both human laboratory and preclinical studies. NEW METHOD: The aim was to develop an automated DNMTS procedure maintained by food pellets in rhesus monkeys using a touch-sensitive screen attached to the housing chamber. Specifically, the DNMTS procedure was a 2-stimulus, 2-choice recognition memory task employing unidimensional discriminative stimuli and randomized delay interval presentations. RESULTS: DNMTS maintained a delay-dependent decrease in discriminability that was independent of the retention interval distribution. Eliminating reinforcer availability during a single delay session or providing food pellets before the session did not systematically alter accuracy, but did reduce total choices. Increasing the intertrial interval enhanced accuracy at short delays. Acute Δ(9)-THC pretreatment produced delay interval-dependent changes in the forgetting function at doses that did not alter total choices. Acute methylphenidate pretreatment only decreased total choices. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: All monkeys were trained to perform NMTS at the 1s training delay within 60 days of initiating operant touch training. Furthermore, forgetting functions were reliably delay interval-dependent and stable over the experimental period (∼6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies, increasing the intertrial interval improved DNMTS performance, whereas Δ(9)-THC disrupted DNMTS performance independent of changes in total choices. Overall, the touchscreen-based DNMTS procedure described provides an efficient method for training and testing experimental manipulations on working memory in unrestrained rhesus monkeys.
Authors: Efrat Aharonovich; Deborah S Hasin; Adam C Brooks; Xinhua Liu; Adam Bisaga; Edward V Nunes Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2005-09-19 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Ning Liu; Yancheng Liu; Yaodong Fan; Hualin Yu; Fraser A W Wilson; Yuanye Ma; Xintian Hu Journal: Brain Res Date: 2005-08-16 Impact factor: 3.252
Authors: John N Bain; Mark A Prendergast; Alvin V Terry; Stephen P Arneric; Mark A Smith; Jerry J Buccafusco Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2003-05-27 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: T J Ornstein; J L Iddon; A M Baldacchino; B J Sahakian; M London; B J Everitt; T W Robbins Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 7.853