Article

Evidence for remembering when events occurred in a rodent model of episodic memory.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-3013, USA.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Impact Factor: 9.81). 06/2009; 106(23):9525-9. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0904360106
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The content of episodic memory consists of representations of unique past events. Episodic memories are grounded in a temporal framework (i.e., we remember when an event occurred). It has recently been argued that episodic-like memory in rats is qualitatively different from human episodic memory because, rather than remembering when an earlier past event occurred, rats used the cue of how long ago it occurred. We asked, therefore, whether rats remember the time of day at which they encountered a distinctive event, in addition to what occurred and where it happened. Rats were tested in the morning and afternoon, on separate days. A distinctive flavor (chocolate) was replenished at a daily-unique location at only one of these times. The interval between first and second daily opportunities to eat (study and test, respectively) was constant. Rats adjusted their revisits to the chocolate location at different times of day by using time of day rather than the cue of how long ago an event occurred. Two lines of evidence suggest that rats remembered the time at which the distinctive event occurred. First, under conditions in which the time of test (but not time of study) was novel, rats immediately transferred their knowledge of the chocolate contingency to the new test time. Second, under conditions in which predictions for study and test times were put in conflict, rats again used study time. Our results suggest that, at the time of memory assessment, rats remember when a recent episode occurred, similar to human episodic memory.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
85 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While the Odor Span Task (OST) was developed to assess working memory in rodents, it appears that odor ("What") and time since an odor was last reinforced ("When") jointly control responding in the OST. The OST uses an incrementing non-match to sample procedure such that the number of stimuli to remember increases during the session; the rodent is trained to remember stimuli within a session but not between sessions. We used a variation of the OST to add a "Where" dimension to the task to examine whether rodents could learn to respond to scents based on contextual cues as well. In Experiment 1, 6 rats well-trained on the OST procedure were exposed to four target scents in a holding cage before the OST session began [What-Where-When (WWW) condition]. When these target scents appeared in the OST, rats treated them as novel scents despite their being previously encountered that day; WWW responding was comparable to baseline (BL) responding. Controls were implemented to account for relative familiarity: frequency of target presentation and time since the target odor was presented. On both types of control probes, rats typically responded to target scents less than during WWW or BL conditions, took longer to make a response, and visited more comparison stimuli. In Experiment 2, the study was replicated adding reinforcement delivery for responding to pre-session presentation of target stimuli. Subjects were the same 6 rats plus 2 additional rats also well-trained on the OST. Results were similar to those from Experiment 1. These data indicate that the variables controlling performance on the OST task include What stimulus is presented, Where (i.e., in which location) it was presented, and When it was presented. Thus, the OST-probe methodology may provide a useful vehicle for the study of episodic-like memory processes in non-humans.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is difficult for rats to acquire daily time-place (TP) learning tasks. One theory suggests that rats do not use time of day as a stimulus signaling a specific response. In the present study, we tested rats' ability to use time of day as a discriminative stimulus. A fixed-interval procedure was used in which one lever provided reinforcement on a FI-5-s schedule in morning sessions, and the same lever provided reinforcement on a FI-30-s schedule in afternoon sessions. Because only one place was used in this paradigm, the rats could only use time of day to acquire the task. Mean responses during the first 5 s of the first trial in each session indicated that the rats did not discriminate between the two sessions. In Phase II, a different lever location was used for each of the two daily sessions, which meant that both spatial and temporal information could be used to acquire the task. The rats readily acquired the task in this phase, and probe trials indicated that the rats were using a combination of spatial and temporal information to discriminate between the two different trial types. When the spatial cue was removed in Phase III, rats no longer discriminated the two sessions, suggesting that time can only be used as a discriminative stimulus when each daily session is associated with a distinct spatial location.
    Learning & Behavior 06/2014; · 1.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The interface of learning and cognition applied to the study of animal behavior represents a target for significant progress if conceptual barriers can be reduced. Is animal behavior exclusively a product of learning or cognition, or are both implicated? Are special (i.e., new) methods required to study cognition or will the enterprise be accomplished by using well-established methods from learning? What types of hypotheses need to be tested to dissociate cognition from learning, and may these hypotheses be profitably tested? This article addresses the above questions by focusing on conceptual, methodological, and hypothesis-testing perspectives for navigating the interface between learning and cognition. Examples from contemporary research are used to develop some suggestions for best practices. The development of a rodent model of episodic memory is used as a case study to feature the validation of an animal model of cognition. Significant progress in navigating the interface of learning and cognition in animals may be made if conceptual barriers can be reduced. This article explores the role of learning and cognition in animal behavior. Although special (i.e., new) methods may be developed to study cognition, the enterprise may also be accomplished by using well-established methods from learning. Hypotheses that need to be tested to dissociate cognition from learning and approaches for profitably testing these hypotheses are outlined. This article addresses the above issues by focusing on conceptual, methodological, and hypothesis-testing perspectives for navigating the interface between learning and cognition. Some suggestions for best practices are proposed based on examples from contemporary research. A case study (the development of a rodent model of episodic memory) is used to feature the validation of an animal model of cognition.

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from