ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2021
A Sensitive Homecage-Based Novel Object Recognition Task for Rodents.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Dissecting novel object exploration in a fully automated homecage-based novel object recognition test.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Hunger modulates exploration through suppression of dopamine signaling in the tail of the striatum.Neuron · 2025Article
- Caffeine and Exercise: A Dual Approach to Combat Cognitive Decline Induced by REM Sleep Deprivation.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Article
- Agmatine Mitigates Diabetes-Related Memory Loss in Female Mice by Targeting IAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Loss of the mitochondrial protein mitoNEET in mice is associated with cognitive impairments and increased neuroinflammation.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- tDCS-induced enhancement of cognitive flexibility in autism: role of frontal lobe and associated neural circuits.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Effects of Quetiapine on Novelty-Related Object Recognition Memory and Hippocampal BDNF Level in Sleep-Deprived Rats.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Article
- Cognitive and anti-inflammatory effects ofFrontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Ethanol Exacerbates the Alzheimer's Disease Pathology in the 5xFAD Mouse Model.Neuroglia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Multiple ammonia-induced episodes of hepatic encephalopathy provoke neuronal cell loss in bile-duct ligated rats.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Article
- Behavioral and cognitive performance of humanized APOEε3/ε3 liver mice in relation to plasma apolipoprotein E levels.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Challenges and advanced concepts for the assessment of learning and memory function in mice.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2023Review
- Characterization of pain-, anxiety-, and cognition-related behaviors in the complete Freund's adjuvant model of chronic inflammatory pain in Wistar-Kyoto rats.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Object recognition tasks in rats: Does sex matter?Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.