Literature DB >> 3735168

Landmark learning and visuo-spatial memories in gerbils.

T S Collett, B A Cartwright, B A Smith.   

Abstract

The aim of this study is to understand what a rodent (Meriones unguiculatus) learns about the geometrical relations between a goal and nearby visual landmarks and how it uses this information to reach a goal. Gerbils were trained to find sunflower seeds on the floor of a light-tight, black painted room illuminated by a single light bulb hung from the ceiling. The position of the seed on the floor was specified by an array of one or more landmarks. Once training was complete, we recorded where the gerbils searched when landmarks were present but the seed was absent. In such tests, gerbils were confronted either with the array of landmarks to which they were accustomed or with a transformation of this array. Animals searched in the appropriate spot when trained to find seeds placed in a constant direction and at a constant distance from a single cylindrical landmark. Since gerbils look in one spot and not in a circle centred on the landmark, the direction between landmark and goal must be supplied by cues external to the landmark array. Distance, on the other hand, must be measured with respect to the landmark. Tests in which the size of the landmark was altered from that used in training suggest that distance is not learned solely in terms of the apparent size of the landmark as seen from the goal. Gerbils can still reach a goal defined by an array of landmarks when the room light is extinguished during their approach. This ability implies that they have already planned a trajectory to the goal before the room is darkened. In order to compute such a trajectory, their internal representation of landmarks and goal needs to contain information about the distances and bearings between landmarks and goal. For planning trajectories, each landmark of an array can be used separately from the others. Gerbils trained to a goal specified by an array of several landmarks were tested with one or more of the landmarks removed or with the array expanded. They then searched as though they had computed an independent trajectory for each landmark. For instance, gerbils trained with an array of two landmarks were tested with the distance between two landmarks doubled. The animals then searched for seeds in two positions, which were at the correct distance and in the right direction from each landmark.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3735168     DOI: 10.1007/bf01324825

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A            Impact factor:   1.836


  3 in total

1.  Studies in spatial learning: Orientation and the short-cut.

Authors:  E C TOLMAN; B F RITCHIE; D KALISH
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1946-02

2.  Studies in spatial learning; place learning versus response learning.

Authors:  E C TOLMAN; B F RITCHIE; D KALISH
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1946-06

3.  Grating acuity of the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus).

Authors:  A G Baker; V F Emerson
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 3.332

  3 in total
  33 in total

1.  Scale-free foraging by primates emerges from their interaction with a complex environment.

Authors:  Denis Boyer; Gabriel Ramos-Fernández; Octavio Miramontes; José L Mateos; Germinal Cocho; Hernán Larralde; Humberto Ramos; Fernando Rojas
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Stimulus control in the use of landmarks by pigeons in a touch-screen task.

Authors:  K Cheng; M L Spetch
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  A neural-network reinforcement-learning model of domestic chicks that learn to localize the centre of closed arenas.

Authors:  Francesco Mannella; Gianluca Baldassarre
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2007-03-29       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Spatial and nonspatial escape strategies in the Barnes maze.

Authors:  Fiona E Harrison; Randall S Reiserer; Andrew J Tomarken; Michael P McDonald
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2006-11-13       Impact factor: 2.460

5.  Spatial decisions and cognitive strategies of monkeys and humans based on abstract spatial stimuli in rotation test.

Authors:  Tereza Nekovarova; Jan Nedvidek; Daniel Klement; Jan Bures
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  What scatter-hoarding animals have taught us about small-scale navigation.

Authors:  Kristy L Gould; Debbie M Kelly; Alan C Kamil
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Path integration and cognitive mapping in a continuous attractor neural network model.

Authors:  A Samsonovich; B L McNaughton
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-08-01       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Visual and vestibular factors influencing vestibular "navigation".

Authors:  I Israël; A M Bronstein; R Kanayama; M Faldon; M A Gresty
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Failure of centrally placed objects to control the firing fields of hippocampal place cells.

Authors:  A Cressant; R U Muller; B Poucet
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 10.  The role of the hippocampus in navigation is memory.

Authors:  Howard Eichenbaum
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.714

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.