Learning, memory and search strategies of inbred mouse strains with different visual abilities in the Barnes maze

O’Leary, Timothy P.; Savoie, Vicki; Brown, Richard E.

doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2010.08.030

Cited by 64 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, we also examined the search strategy used by the injured mice to locate the hidden platform. 24 This parallels the type of search strategy analysis proposed for the Barnes maze, 44,45 which was effectively used previously in this TBI model. 12 Sham-injured mice primarily employed a spatial strategy to locate the platform; use of this strategy decreased with injury severity.…”

Section: Fig 10mentioning

confidence: 70%

Comparing the Predictive Value of Multiple Cognitive, Affective, and Motor Tasks after Rodent Traumatic Brain Injury

Zhao

Loane

Murray

et al. 2012

Journal of Neurotrauma

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controlled cortical impact injury (CCI) is a widely-used, clinically-relevant model of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Although functional outcomes have been used for years in this model, little work has been done to compare the predictive value of various cognitive and sensorimotor assessment tests, singly or in combination. Such information would be particularly useful for assessing mechanisms of injury or therapeutic interventions. Following isoflurane anesthesia, C57BL/6 mice were subjected to sham, mild (5.0 m/sec), moderate (6.0 m/sec), or severe (7.5 m/sec) CCI. A battery of behavioral tests were evaluated and compared, including the standard Morris water maze (sMWM), reversal Morris water maze (rMWM), novel object recognition (NOR), passive avoidance (PA), tail-suspension (TS), beam walk (BW), and open-field locomotor activity. The BW task, performed at post-injury days (PID) 0, 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28, showed good discrimination as a function of injury severity. The sMWM and rMWM tests (PID 14-23), as well as NOR (PID 24 and 25), effectively discriminated spatial and novel object learning and memory across injury severity levels. Notably, the rMWM showed the greatest separation between mild and moderate/severe injury. PA (PID 27 and 28) and TS (PID 24) also reflected differences across injury levels, but to a lesser degree. We also compared individual functional measures with histological outcomes such as lesion volume and neuronal cell loss across anatomical regions. In addition, we created a novel composite behavioral score index from individual complementary behavioral scores, and it provided superior discrimination across injury severities compared to individual tests. In summary, this study demonstrates the feasibility of using a larger number of complementary functional outcome behavioral tests than those traditionally employed to follow post-traumatic recovery after TBI, and suggests that the composite score may be a helpful tool for screening new neuroprotective agents or for addressing injury mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Fig 10mentioning

confidence: 70%

Comparing the Predictive Value of Multiple Cognitive, Affective, and Motor Tasks after Rodent Traumatic Brain Injury

Zhao

Loane

Murray

et al. 2012

Journal of Neurotrauma

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the SWBM, even when trained with a stable escape hole location, mice used the serial search strategy throughout acquisition and reversal training. We have previously suggested that the increased use of the serial strategy on the SWBM is due to the wall surrounding the maze, which promotes thigmotaxis and/or occludes extra-maze visual cues (O'Leary et al 2011). Although the relative influence of each of these factors on performance is unknown, we do not expect that the spatial search strategy can be acquired with transparent walls, which do not occlude extramaze cues, as mice also did not use intra-maze visual cues to locate the escape hole on the SWBM design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the present experiment used C57BL/6J mice, and the recommended apparatus design and test procedure may not be optimal for other mouse strains, such as 129S1/SvImJ and A/J, which show low levels of exploration on the Barnes maze (Holmes et al 2002;O'Leary et al 2011). For example, DBA/2J mice perform better in a modified Barnes maze with holes distributed throughout the edge and center of the maze and when appetitive food reward is used than on a Barnes maze design with holes around the edge and aversive stimuli (Youn et al 2012).…”

Section: Should Apparatus Design and Test Procedures On The Barnes Mazmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, performance differences between inbred strains on the Barnes maze are not always replicable across studies (Holmes et al 2002;Nguyen et al 2002;O'Leary et al 2011), and on some designs blind mice can perform as well as sighted mice can, indicating that visual cues are not being used (Garcia et al 2004;O'Leary et al 2011;Yassine et al 2013). These problems may be due to the use of suboptimal apparatus designs or procedures to test mice on the Barnes maze.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, performance measures which do not rely on speed of locomotion, such as the number of errors, distance traveled, and search path, have been used to analyze learning on the Barnes maze. Although Pompl et al (1999) found that measures of total latency and errors were sensitive enough to detect learning impairment on the Barnes maze, other researchers have found that these measures have poor sensitivity for detecting differences between groups (Garcia et al 2004;Harrison et al 2006;O'Leary et al 2011), while the sensitivities of other measures of learning and memory have yet to be evaluated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Optimization of apparatus design and behavioral measures for the assessment of visuo-spatial learning and memory of mice on the Barnes maze

O’Leary

Brown

2013

Learn. Mem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have previously shown that apparatus design can affect visual -spatial cue use and memory performance of mice on the Barnes maze. The present experiment extends these findings by determining the optimal behavioral measures and test procedure for analyzing visuo-spatial learning and memory in three different Barnes maze designs. Male and female C57BL/6J mice were trained with a stable or random escape hole location and the sensitivities (statistical power) of four commonly used measures of learning and three measures of memory to detect differences between these training procedures were compared on each maze design. A maze design with a large diameter and no wall was optimal, because mice showed a reliable use of extra-maze visual cues, visuo-spatial search strategies, and spatial memory. A maze design with a small diameter, surrounding wall, and intra-maze visual cues was the least sensitive for determining visuo-spatial learning and memory, because mice showed little evidence of extra-maze cue use. Errors, distance traveled, and hole deviation scores were more sensitive measures of learning than latency to find the escape hole. Measures based on locating the escape hole (primary measures) were more sensitive than measures based on entering the escape hole (total measures). Measures of memory had similar levels of sensitivity on each maze. This experiment demonstrates that both apparatus design and the behavioral measures used as indicators of learning and memory can influence the ability of the Barnes maze to detect visuo-spatial learning and memory impairments in mice.

show abstract

Otoconia‐deficient mice show selective spatial deficits

Yoder

Kirby

2014

Hippocampus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Damage or inactivation of the vestibular system impairs performance on various spatial memory tasks, but few studies have attempted to disambiguate the roles of the semicircular canals and otolith organs in this performance. The present study tested the otolithic contribution to spatial working and reference memory by evaluating the performance of otoconia-deficient tilted mice on a radial arm maze and a Barnes maze. One radial arm maze task provided both intramaze and extramaze cues, whereas the other task provided only extramaze cues. The Barnes maze task provided only extramaze cues. On the radial arm maze, tilted mice performed similar to control mice when intramaze cues were available, but made more working and reference memory errors than control mice when only extramaze cues were available. On the Barnes maze task, control and tilted mice showed similar latency, distance, and errors during acquisition training. On the subsequent probe trial, both groups spent the greatest percentage of time in the goal quadrant, indicating they were able to use extramaze cues to guide their search. Overall, these results suggest signals originating in the otolith organs contribute to spatial memory, but are not necessary for all aspects of spatial performance.

show abstract

Learning, memory and search strategies of inbred mouse strains with different visual abilities in the Barnes maze

Cited by 64 publications

References 42 publications

Comparing the Predictive Value of Multiple Cognitive, Affective, and Motor Tasks after Rodent Traumatic Brain Injury

Comparing the Predictive Value of Multiple Cognitive, Affective, and Motor Tasks after Rodent Traumatic Brain Injury

Optimization of apparatus design and behavioral measures for the assessment of visuo-spatial learning and memory of mice on the Barnes maze

Otoconia‐deficient mice show selective spatial deficits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About