4.2 Article

Rat spatial memory and foraging on dual radial mazes

Journal

LEARNING & BEHAVIOR
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3758/s13420-023-00592-2

Keywords

Foraging; Spatial memory; Rats; Radial maze

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three experiments were conducted to investigate spatial memory in rats using a new test. Rats were tested in a dual eight-arm radial maze, where they had to remember the location of food rewards. The results showed that rats were able to form reference and working memory, and they displayed a preference for the maze with a known food reward or a cue indicating the reward location. These findings suggest that rats use a two-step strategy to navigate the maze.
Three experiments are reported that used a new test of spatial memory in rats. The apparatus used was dual eight-arm radial mazes that were connected at one arm of each maze, with a start arm and doors to each maze. Rats could be forced to go to one maze or the other or could make a free choice between mazes. In Experiment 1, rats formed reference memory for the arm containing food on one maze but had food randomly placed on different arms over trials on the other maze. In Experiment 2, rats formed working memory for the arm containing food on one maze but not the other. In Experiment 3, food location changed randomly among trials on both mazes, but one maze contained a cue for the location of food. Rats used reference and working memory to go directly to the food arm on one maze but found food only after searching several arms on the other maze. Most importantly, when given free-choice trials rats developed a significant preference for the maze where they knew the location of food reward or found the cue indicating the location of reward. We suggest these findings may be best interpreted by rats applying two successive rules: (1) choose the maze that leads to the most immediate reward, and (2) use extramaze or intramaze cues to find reward location on the maze.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available