Sampedro-Piquero Patricia, Mañas-Padilla M Carmen, Ávila-Gámiz Fabiola, Gil-Rodríguez Sara, Santín Luis J, Castilla-Ortega Estela
Insituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga-IBIMA, Malaga, Spain.
Departamento de Psicobiología y Metodología de las CC, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Málaga, Campus de Teatinos S/N, 29071, Malaga, Spain.
Anim Cogn. 2019 May;22(3):433-443. doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01256-3. Epub 2019 Mar 9.
The classic hole-board paradigm (a square arena with 16 holes arranged equidistantly in a 4 × 4 pattern) assesses both exploration and spatial memory in rodents. For spatial memory training, food rewards are hidden in a fixed set of holes. The animal must not visit (i.e. nose-poke) the holes that are never baited (reference memory; RM) nor re-visit a baited hole within a session (working memory; WM). However, previous exploratory bias may affect performance during reward searching. During habituation sessions with either all holes rewarded or all holes empty, mice intrinsically preferred poking peripheral holes (especially those located in the maze's corners) over centre holes. During spatial memory training, mice progressively shifted their hole pokes and staying time to the central area that contained hidden rewards, while mice exposed to the empty apparatus still preferred the periphery. A group of pseudotrained mice, for whom rewards were located randomly throughout the maze, also increased their central preference. Furthermore, reward location influenced memory measures. Most repeated pokes (WM-errors) were scored in the locations that were most intrinsically appealing to mice (i.e. the corner and wall-baited holes), supporting a strong influence of previous exploratory bias. Regarding RM, finding rewards located in the centre holes, which were initially less preferred, entailed more difficulty and required more trials to learn. This outcome was confirmed by a second experiment that varied the pattern of rewarded holes, as well as the starting positions. Therefore, reward location is a relevant aspect to consider when designing a hole-board memory task.
经典的洞板范式(一个方形场地,有16个洞以4×4的模式等距排列)用于评估啮齿动物的探索能力和空间记忆。在空间记忆训练中,食物奖励被藏在一组固定的洞中。动物不得访问(即探鼻)那些从未放置过诱饵的洞(参考记忆;RM),也不得在一次训练中再次访问已放置诱饵的洞(工作记忆;WM)。然而,先前的探索偏好可能会影响奖励搜索过程中的表现。在所有洞都有奖励或所有洞都为空的习惯化训练过程中,小鼠本质上更喜欢探周边的洞(尤其是位于迷宫角落的那些洞)而不是中央的洞。在空间记忆训练期间,小鼠逐渐将它们的探洞行为和停留时间转移到包含隐藏奖励的中央区域,而暴露在空装置中的小鼠仍然更喜欢周边区域。一组伪训练小鼠,其奖励在迷宫中随机放置,它们也增加了对中央区域的偏好。此外,奖励位置影响记忆指标。大多数重复探洞(WM错误)出现在对小鼠最具内在吸引力的位置(即角落和墙边放置诱饵的洞),这支持了先前探索偏好的强烈影响。关于RM,找到最初不太受青睐的位于中央洞中的奖励更困难,并且需要更多试验来学习。第二个改变奖励洞模式以及起始位置的实验证实了这一结果。因此,在设计洞板记忆任务时,奖励位置是一个需要考虑的相关因素。