Behavioural, electrophysiological, and anatomical evidence suggests that retrosplenial (RS) cortex (areas RSA and RSG) plays a role in spatial navigation. It has been recently suggested that it is damage to the underlying cingulum bundle (CG) (areas CG and IG), and not RS, tht disrupts spatial place learning. I revisited this issue by comparing the rat strains and lesions used in studies that typically report RS deficits, to those used in studies in which no RS deficit is reported. I found both selective RS damage and selective CG damage to disrupt spatial behaviour, suggesting independent contributions to spatial learning and memory from both of these structures. Further, previous failures to find RS deficits are shown to be the result of an inappropriate choice of rat strain for studying normal brain-behaviour relationships combined with a failure to use appropriate testing methods for assessing spatial behaviour. / x, 134 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Pattern vision in the rat bas been most effectively studied by a jumping method devised by Lashley (1930). This procedure requires the rat to jump at one of two cards bearing the patterns to be discriminated. On the basis of Laehley’s extensive anatomical and behavioural studies it has been assumed that the cards fall within the rat’s binocular field of vision and, consequently, that they are seen as a whole at the time when the visual patterns begin to influence behaviour during discrimination learning. Ehrenfreund (1948), however, thought that the rat’s effective field, in the Lashley jumping apparatus, might be limited to the lower margin of the cards, and has demonstrated this experimentally in certain conditions of training. Since Ehrenfreund’s data have been interpreted as bearing on the current continuity-noncontinuity controversy concerning the nature of learning, his experiment is of general importance. Ehrenfreund trained his rats on a modified Lashley jumping apparatus to discriminate between an upright and an inverted triangle in two differing experimental situations. In one condition, the triangles were raised eight centimetres above the bottom margin of the cards. The platform from which the rats jumped, as in the usual procedure, remained level with the platform on which they found food. In the second, the platform was also raised, so that the rats were jumping at the centre of the cards where the triangles were now located. [...]

No description available.

No description available.

Issued also as Thesis--University of Chicago.

Issued also as Thesis--University of Chicago.

Hoarding or hoarding behavior refers to the active storing and accumulation of food or other objects by an animal. Hoarding is often experimentally defined as the act of transporting food or objects, from some area outside the Ss home cage, back to the home cage. A typical hoarding experiment involves manipulation of an independent variable (e. g., amount of food deprivation, previous experience, early experience, strain of rat .• choice of hoarding material}, followed by measurement of the number of food pellets or objects hoarded during daily 30 min. hoarding trials. A hoarding trial involves allowing the subject access to the hoarding material by means of an alleyway attached to its home cage. Ss then have an allotted amount of time (e.g., 30 min., 24 hrs.) in which to transport the hoarding material to their home cages. To insure hoarding will take place, Ss are often food deprived prior to the first of a set of hoarding trials, or prior to each daily hoarding trial. Though laboratory rats will hoard food without being food deprived (Bindra, 1948) deprivation prior to trials facilitates the amount of hoarding (Morgan, Stellar & Johnson, 1943; Guerra, 1970).