Incrementing non-matching- but not matching-to-sample is rapidly learned in an automated version of the odor span task
- PMID: 35217968
- DOI: 10.1007/s10071-022-01608-6
Incrementing non-matching- but not matching-to-sample is rapidly learned in an automated version of the odor span task
Abstract
The odor span task (OST) is frequently used to assess memory capacity in rodents. Odor stimuli are presented in a large arena and choices of session-novel odors produce food reward. The procedure can be described as an incrementing non-matching-to-sample contingency because on each trial one new stimulus is presented along with one or more previously presented (non-reinforced) comparison odors. An automated version of this task has recently been developed in which odors are presented with an olfactometer in an operant chamber using a successive conditional discrimination procedure. The present study compared the acquisition of matching- vs. non-matching-to-sample versions of the task with six rats tested under each procedure. All six rats trained on the non-matching variation showed rapid acquisition of the discrimination with high rates of responding to odor stimuli when they were session-novel and low rates of responding to subsequent presentations of those odors. However, only three of the six rats trained on the matching variation met acquisition criteria, and two of the three that did acquire the task required extensive training to do so. These results support findings from the OST that rats can differentiate between stimuli that are session-novel and those previously encountered, but also that a matching contingency is more difficult to learn than a non-matching arrangement. These findings parallel differences observed between acquisition of simple matching- and non-matching-to-sample tasks, but accounts such as novelty preference or the oddity preference effect may not be sufficient to explain the present results.
Keywords: Incrementing matching-to-sample; Incrementing non-matching-to-sample; Oddity preference effect; Odor span task; Rats; Successive conditional discrimination.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Similar articles
-
Successive incrementing non-matching-to-samples in rats: An automated version of the odor span task.J Exp Anal Behav. 2020 Sep;114(2):248-265. doi: 10.1002/jeab.619. Epub 2020 Jul 29. J Exp Anal Behav. 2020. PMID: 32725820
-
Generalized, cross-modal, and incrementing non-matching-to-sample in rats.Learn Behav. 2023 Mar;51(1):88-107. doi: 10.3758/s13420-023-00571-7. Epub 2023 Jan 25. Learn Behav. 2023. PMID: 36697934
-
Odor span task in dogs (Canis familiaris).Anim Cogn. 2020 May;23(3):571-580. doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01362-7. Epub 2020 Feb 25. Anim Cogn. 2020. PMID: 32100208
-
The Magic Number 70 (plus or minus 20): Variables Determining Performance in the Rodent Odor Span Task.Learn Motiv. 2013 Aug 1;44(3):143-158. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2013.03.001. Learn Motiv. 2013. PMID: 23729864 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of NMDA antagonist dizocilpine (MK-801) are modulated by the number of distractor stimuli in the rodent odor span task of working memory.Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2019 May;161:51-56. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2019.03.004. Epub 2019 Mar 9. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2019. PMID: 30862525 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Evidence for novelty reward cross-cueing in the odor span task in rats: implications for odor-based reward-motivated tasks.Learn Mem. 2024 Jan 29;31(1-2):a053871. doi: 10.1101/lm.053871.123. Print 2024 Jan-Feb. Learn Mem. 2024. PMID: 38286523 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bruce K, Dyer K, Mathews M, Nealley C, Phasukkan T, Prichard A, Galizio M (2018) Successive odor matching- and non-matching-to-sample in rats: a reversal design. Behavioral Processes 155:26–32 - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous