Literature DB >> 28336570

Task-Dependent Behavioral Dynamics Make the Case for Temporal Integration in Multiple Strategies during Odor Processing.

Donald E Frederick1,2, Austin Brown2,3, Stephanie Tacopina2, Nisarg Mehta2, Mark Vujovic2, Elizabeth Brim3, Tasneem Amina3, Bethany Fixsen3, Leslie M Kay4,2,3.   

Abstract

Differing results in olfactory-based decision-making research regarding the amount of time that rats and mice use to identify odors have led to some disagreements about odor-processing mechanics, including whether or not rodents use temporal integration (i.e., sniffing longer to identify odors better). Reported differences in behavioral strategies may be due to the different types of tasks used in different laboratories. Some researchers have reported that animals performing two-alternative choice (TAC) tasks need only 1-2 sniffs and do not increase performance with longer sampling. Others have reported that animals performing go/no-go (GNG) tasks increase sampling times and performance for difficult discriminations, arguing for temporal integration. We present results from four experiments comparing GNG and TAC tasks over several behavioral variables (e.g., performance, sampling duration). When rats know only one task, they perform better in GNG than in TAC. However, performance was not statistically different when rats learned and were tested in both tasks. Rats sample odors longer in GNG than in TAC, even when they know both tasks and perform them in the same or different sessions. Longer sampling is associated with better performance for both tasks in difficult discriminations, which supports the case for temporal integration over ≥2-6 sniffs in both tasks. These results illustrate that generalizations from a single task about behavioral or cognitive abilities (e.g., processing, perception) do not capture the full range of complexity and can significantly impact inferences about general abilities in sensory perception.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Behavioral tasks and training and testing history affect measured outcomes in cognitive tests. Rats sample odors longer in a go/no-go (GNG) than in a two-alternative choice (TAC) task, performing better in GNG unless they know both tasks. Odor-sampling time is extended in both tasks when the odors to be discriminated are very similar. Rats may extend sampling time to integrate odor information up to ∼0.5 s (2-6 sniffs). Such factors as task, task parameters, and training history affect decision times and performance, making it important to use multiple tasks when making inferences about sensory or cognitive processing.
Copyright © 2017 the authors 0270-6474/17/374416-11$15.00/0.

Entities:  

Keywords:  go/no-go; odor discrimination; olfactory behavior; psychometric model; temporal integration; two-alternative choice

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28336570      PMCID: PMC5413182          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1797-16.2017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  19 in total

Review 1.  Mechanisms of odor discrimination: neurophysiological and behavioral approaches.

Authors:  Rainer W Friedrich
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2005-11-14       Impact factor: 13.837

2.  Speed-accuracy tradeoff in olfaction.

Authors:  Dmitry Rinberg; Alexei Koulakov; Alan Gelperin
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2006-08-03       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 3.  When good enough is best.

Authors:  Leslie M Kay; Jennifer Beshel; Claire Martin
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2006-08-03       Impact factor: 17.173

4.  Gamma and Beta Oscillations Define a Sequence of Neurocognitive Modes Present in Odor Processing.

Authors:  Donald E Frederick; Austin Brown; Elizabeth Brim; Nisarg Mehta; Mark Vujovic; Leslie M Kay
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Maintaining accuracy at the expense of speed: stimulus similarity defines odor discrimination time in mice.

Authors:  Nixon M Abraham; Hartwig Spors; Alan Carleton; Troy W Margrie; Thomas Kuner; Andreas T Schaefer
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2004-12-02       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Dynamics of olfactory bulb input and output activity during odor stimulation in zebrafish.

Authors:  Rainer W Friedrich; Gilles Laurent
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-02-11       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Interplay between sniffing and odorant sorptive properties in the rat.

Authors:  Daniel Rojas-Líbano; Leslie M Kay
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 8.  Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience.

Authors:  Christopher D Chambers; Hugh Garavan; Mark A Bellgrove
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2008-09-11       Impact factor: 8.989

9.  Similar odor discrimination behavior in head-restrained and freely moving mice.

Authors:  Nixon M Abraham; Delphine Guerin; Khaleel Bhaukaurally; Alan Carleton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature.

Authors:  Denes Szucs; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  7 in total

1.  A specific olfactory cortico-thalamic pathway contributing to sampling performance during odor reversal learning.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Courtiol; Michelle Neiman; Gloria Fleming; Catia M Teixeira; Donald A Wilson
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 3.270

2.  Plasticity of Sniffing Pattern and Neural Activity in the Olfactory Bulb of Behaving Mice During Odor Sampling, Anticipation, and Reward.

Authors:  Penglai Liu; Tiantian Cao; Jinshan Xu; Xingfeng Mao; Dejuan Wang; Anan Li
Journal:  Neurosci Bull       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 5.203

3.  The Physiological Foresight in Freeman's Work: Predictions and Verifications.

Authors:  Leslie M Kay
Journal:  J Conscious Stud       Date:  2018

Review 4.  Decision-making behaviors: weighing ethology, complexity, and sensorimotor compatibility.

Authors:  Ashley L Juavinett; Jeffrey C Erlich; Anne K Churchland
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2017-11-25       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Transfer of Odor Perception From the Retronasal to the Orthonasal Pathway.

Authors:  Rui He; Talicia C Dukes; Leslie M Kay
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 3.160

6.  Smell-induced gamma oscillations in human olfactory cortex are required for accurate perception of odor identity.

Authors:  Qiaohan Yang; Guangyu Zhou; Torben Noto; Jessica W Templer; Stephan U Schuele; Joshua M Rosenow; Gregory Lane; Christina Zelano
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 8.029

7.  Primacy coding facilitates effective odor discrimination when receptor sensitivities are tuned.

Authors:  David Zwicker
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 4.475

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.