Assessment of Learning and Memory Using the Autoshaping of Operant Responding in Mice

James E. Barrett1, K.E. Vanover2

1 Memory Pharmaceuticals, Montvale, New Jersey, 2 ACADIA Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, California
Publication Name:  Current Protocols in Neuroscience
Unit Number:  Unit 8.5F
DOI:  10.1002/0471142301.ns0805fs25
Online Posting Date:  February, 2004
GO TO THE FULL TEXT: PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library


This unit describes the use of an automated procedure for developing an operant response (“autoshaping”) in the mouse. The method has applications in the study of the acquisition of behavior (learning) as well as for the assessment of memory or retention of that task.

Keywords: mouse; autoshaping; operant responding; learning; memory; operant conditioning; respondent conditioning

PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Table of Contents

  • Basic Protocol 1: Use of the Autoshaping Procedure to Assess Learning and Memory
  • Alternate Protocol 1: Use of the Autoshaping Procedure to Evaluate the Effects of Drugs on Acquisition and Retention
  • Commentary
  • Acknowledgement
  • Literature Cited
  • Figures
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library


Basic Protocol 1: Use of the Autoshaping Procedure to Assess Learning and Memory

  • Male or female mice (individually housed)
  • Food
  • Sucrose solution for reinforcement (110 g/liter water)
  • Experimental operant chamber (Med Associates) specially adapted for mice (see Figure ) and related computer control and interface equipment
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library



Literature Cited

Literature Cited
   Abel, T. and Lattal, K.M. 2001. Molecular mechanisms of memory acquisition consolidation and retrieval. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 11:180‐187.
   Barco, A., Pittenger, C., and Kandel, E. 2003. CREB memory enhancement and the treatment of memory disorders: Promises pitfalls and prospects. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets. 7:101‐114.
   Bourtchuladze, R., Frenguelli, B., Blendy, J., Cioffi, D., Schutz, G., and Silva, A.J. 1994. Deficient long‐term memory in mice with a targeted mutation of the cAMP‐responsive element‐binding protein. Cell 79:59‐68.
   Brown, P.L. and Jenkins, H.M. 1968. Auto‐shaping of the pigeon's key‐peck. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 11:1‐8.
   Buccafusco, J.J. and Terry, A.V. Jr. 2000. Multiple central nervous system targets for eliciting beneficial effects on memory and cognition. J. Pharm. Exp. Ther. 295:438‐46.
   Buccafusco, J.J., Terry, A.V. Jr., and Murdoch, P.B. 2002. A computer‐assisted cognitive test battery for aged monkeys. J. Mol. Neurosci. 19:179‐85.
   Cook, L., Nickolson, V.J., Steinfels, G.F., Rohrbach, K.W., and DeNoble, V.J. 1990. Cognition enhancement by the acetylcholine releaser DuP 996. Drug Dev. Res. 19:301‐314.
   Ennaceur, A. and Delacour, J. 1988. A new one‐trial test for neurobiological studies of memory in rats. 1: Behavioral data. Behav. Brain Res. 31:47‐59.
   Ferster, C.B. and Skinner, B.F. 1957. Schedules of reinforcement. Appleton‐Century‐Crofts New York.
   Gold, L.H. 1996. Integration of molecular biological techniques and behavioural pharmacology. Behav. Pharm. 7:589‐615.
   Kandel, E. 2001. The molecular biology of memory storage: A dialogue between genes and synapses. Science. 294:1030‐1038.
   Malleret, G., Haditsch, U., Genoux, D., Jones, M., Bliss, T., Vanhoose, A.M., Weitlauf, C., Kandel, E.R., Winder, D.G., and Mansuy, I.M. 2001. Inducible and reversible enhancement of learning memory and long‐term potentiation by genetic inhibition of calcineurin. Cell 104:675‐686.
   Messing, R.B., Leven, M.S., and Sparber, S.B. 1986. Delaying reinforcement in an autoshaping task generates adjunctive and superstitious behavior. Behav. Processes 13:327‐338.
   Ohno, M., Frankland, P., Chen, A., Costa, R., and Silva, A. 2001. Inducible pharmacogenetic approaches to the study of learning and memory. Nature Neurosci. 4:1238‐1243.
   Szczepanski, K., Vivian, J.A., Dorsch, K., Blokland, A., Hedley, L., Lieben, C.K.J., Martin, J.R., Moreau, J.L., Secchi, R.L., Sik, A., Sung, E., and Schreiber, R. 2002. Procognitive effects of the 5‐HT6 receptor antagonist RO4368554. Soc. Neurosci. Abst. 290:20.
   Sidman, M. and Fletcher, F.G. 1968. A demonstration of auto‐shaping with monkeys. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 11:307‐309.
   Sparber, S.B., Bollweg, G.L., and Messing, R.B. 1991. Food deprivation enhances both autoshaping and autoshaping impairment by a latent inhibition procedure. Behav. Processes 23:59‐74.
   Vanover, K.E. and Barrett, J.E. 1998. An automated learning and memory model in mice: Pharmacological and behavioral evaluation of an autoshaped response. Behav. Pharm. 9:273‐283.
   Williams, B.A. and McDevitt, M.A. 2002. Inhibition and superconditioning. Psychol. Science 13:454‐459.
   Zeng, H., Chattarji, S., Barbarosie, M., Rondi‐Reig, L., Philpot, B., Miyakawa, T., Bear, M.F., and Tonegawa, S. 2001. Forebrain‐specific calcineurin knockout selectivity impairs bidirectional synaptic plasticity and working/episodic‐like memory. Cell 107:617‐629.
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library