Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34177480›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2021

A Sensitive Homecage-Based Novel Object Recognition Task for Rodents.

Jessica I Wooden, Michael J Spinetta, Teresa Nguyen, Charles I O'Leary, J Leigh Leasure

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cognitive and anti-inflammatory effects ofFrontiers in neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Pregnancy-induced oxidative stress and inflammation are not associated with impaired maternal neuronal activity or memory function.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Object recognition tasks in rats: Does sex matter?Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jessica I WoodenDepartment of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States.
Michael J SpinettaDepartment of Psychology, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, United States.
Teresa NguyenDepartment of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States.
Charles I O'LearyDepartment of Psychology, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, United States.
J Leigh LeasureDepartment of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, United States.

Funding

Alcohol, Exercise & the Female BrainR01AA025380 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON · PI LEASURE, J LEIGH · 2018 to 2022
$1.7M
Brain Damage and Exercise Neurorestoration After Repeated Binge Alcohol ExposureR21AA021260 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON · PI LEASURE, J LEIGH · 2013 to 2014
$385k
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA025380NIAAA NIH HHS R21 AA021260
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recognition of novel objects is a common cognitive test for rodents, but current paradigms have limitations, such as low sensitivity, possible odor confounds and stress due to being performed outside of the homecage. We have developed a paradigm that takes place in the homecage and utilizes four stimuli per trial, to increase sensitivity. Odor confounds are eliminated because stimuli consist of inexpensive, machined wooden beads purchased in bulk, so each experimental animal has its own set of stimuli. This paradigm consists of three steps. In Step 1, the sampling phase, animals freely explore familiar objects (FO). Novel Objects (NO1 and NO2) are soiled with bedding from the homecage, to acquire odor cues identical to those of the FO. Steps 2 and 3 are test phases. Herein we report results of this paradigm from neurologically intact adult rats and mice of both sexes. Identical procedures were used for both species, except that the stimuli used for the mice were smaller. As expected in Step 2 (NO1 test phase), male and female rats and mice explored NO1 significantly more than FO. In Step 3 (NO2 test phase), rats of both sexes demonstrated a preference for NO2, while this was seen only in female mice. These results indicate robust novelty recognition during Steps 2 and 3 in rats. In mice, this was reliably seen only in Step 2, indicating that Step 3 was difficult for them under the given parameters. This paradigm provides flexibility in that length of the sampling phase, and the delay between test and sampling phases can be adjusted, to tailor task difficulty to the model being tested. In sum, this novel object recognition test is simple to perform, requires no expensive supplies or equipment, is conducted in the homecage (reducing stress), eliminates odor confounds, utilizes 4 stimuli to increase sensitivity, can be performed in both rats and mice, and is highly flexible, as sampling phase and the delay between steps can be adjusted to tailor task difficulty. Collectively, these results indicate that this paradigm can be used to quantify novel object recognition across sex and species.

Indexed as

ethological relevanceexplorationmemorynovelty recognitionodorsex differences

Identifiers

PMID34177480
PMCPMC8232937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.