Similarities and differences in spatial learning and object recognition between young male C57Bl/6J mice and sprague-dawley rats

Behavioral Neuroscience

Volumn 125, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 791-795

  Stranahan, Alexis M ^a  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Hippocampus; Object recognition; Species difference; Water maze

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; MALE; MAZE TEST; MEMORY CONSOLIDATION; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; OBJECT RECOGNITION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; RAT; RECOGNITION; RESPONSE TIME; SPATIAL DISCRIMINATION; SPATIAL MEMORY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ANIMALS; MALE; MAZE LEARNING; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SPATIAL BEHAVIOR; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 80053597366     PISSN: 07357044     EISSN: 19390084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0025133     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Broadbent N.J., Gaskin S., Squire L.R., Clark R.E. Object recognition memory and the rodent hippocampus. Learning and Memory 2009, 17:5-11. 10.1101/lm.1650110.
2. Frick K.M., Stillner E.T., Berger-Sweeney J. Mice are not little rats: Species differences in a one-day water maze task. Neuroreport 2000, 11:3461-3465. 10.1097/00001756-200011090-00013.
3. Gibbs R.A., Weinstock G.M., Metzker M.L., Muzny D.M., Sodergren E.J., Scherer S. Genome sequence of the Brown Norway rat yields insights into mammalian evolution (Rat Genome Sequencing Project Consortium). Nature 2004, 428:493-521. 10.1038/nature02426.
4. Montkowski A., Poettig M., Mederer A., Holsboer F. Behavioural performance in three substrains of mouse strain 129. Brain Research 1997, 762:12-18. 10.1016/S0006-8993(97)00370-3.
5. Morris R.G., Moser E.I., Riedel G., Martin S.J., Sandin J., Day M., O'Carroll C. Elements of a neurobiological theory of the hippocampus: The role of activity-dependent synaptic plasticity in memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 2003, 358:773-786. 10.1098/rstb.2002.1264.
6. Rampon C., Tang Y.P., Goodhouse J., Shimizu E., Kyin M., Tsien J.Z. Enrichment induces structural changes and recovery from nonspatial memory deficits in CA1 NMDAR1-knockout mice. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:238-244. 10.1038/72945.
7. Routh B.N., Johnston D., Harris K., Chitwood R.A. Anatomical and electrophysiological comparison of CA1 pyramidal neurons of the rat and mouse. Journal of Neurophysiology 2009, 102:2288-2302. 10.1152/jn.00082.2009.
8. Smith D.R., Gallagher M., Stanton M.E. Genetic background differences and nonassociative effects in mouse trace fear conditioning. Learning and Memory 2007, 14:597-605. 10.1101/lm.614807.
9. Stranahan A.M., Arumugam T.V., Lee K., Cutler R.G., Egan J.P., Mattson M.P. Diabetes impairs hippocampal function through glucocorticoid-mediated effects on new and mature neurons. Nature Neuroscience 2008, 11:309-317. 10.1038/nn2055.
10. van Groen T., Kadish I., Wyss J.M. Species differences in the projections from the entorhinal cortex to the hippocampus. Brain Research Bulletin 2002, 57:553-556.
11. Whishaw I.Q. A comparison of rats and mice in a swimming pool place task and matching to place task: Some surprising differences. Physiology and Behavior 1995, 58:687-693. 10.1016/0031-9384(95)00110-5.
12. Whishaw I.Q., Tomie J. Of mice and mazes: Similarities between mice and rats on dry land but not water mazes. Physiology and Behavior 1996, 60:1191-1197. 10.1016/S0031-9384(96)00176-X.
13. Winters B.D., Saksida L.M., Bussey T.J. Object recognition memory: Neurobiological mechanisms of encoding, consolidation and retrieval. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2008, 32:1055-1070. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.04.004.