Common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) excel in a one-trial spatial memory test, yet perform poorly in a classical memory task

IF 1.9 2区 生物学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Sandro Sehner, Flávia Mobili, Erik P. Willems, Judith M. Burkart
{"title":"Common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) excel in a one-trial spatial memory test, yet perform poorly in a classical memory task","authors":"Sandro Sehner,&nbsp;Flávia Mobili,&nbsp;Erik P. Willems,&nbsp;Judith M. Burkart","doi":"10.1007/s10071-025-01944-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When quantifying animal cognition, memory represents one of the most tested domains and is key to understanding cognitive evolution. Memory tests thus play an important role in comparative cognitive research, yet slight variations in the experimental settings can substantially change the outcome, questioning whether different memory tests tap into different memory systems or whether they test memory at all. Here, we first assessed memory performance of 16 common marmosets (<i>Callithrix jacchus</i>) in two distinct paradigms varying in their format and delay. First, we examined marmoset memory in a 24-h delay memory test (24 h-DMT) in which they could freely explore an environment with three novel objects of which one contained food. We examined their retention the day after, and the procedure was iterated cumulatively with previous objects remaining in the enclosure until the marmosets had to choose the correct out of 30 objects. Second, we administered a classical delayed response test (DRT) in the same animals with three objects and a maximum delay of 30 s. In the DRT, marmoset performance was poor and not better than chance after 15 s already. However, individuals excelled in the 24 h-DMT, performing above chance level after 24 h even with tenfold the number of objects to choose from compared to the DRT. Moreover, individual performances in the two tests were not correlated, and typical age effects on memory could not be detected in both experiments. Together, these results suggest that the two tests explore different domains, and that the 24 h-DMT examines long-term memory. The outcome of the DRT is more difficult to assign to memory since individuals performed only moderately even in the 0-s delay condition. This puts into question whether this task design indeed tests memory or other cognitive processes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7879,"journal":{"name":"Animal Cognition","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10071-025-01944-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10071-025-01944-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When quantifying animal cognition, memory represents one of the most tested domains and is key to understanding cognitive evolution. Memory tests thus play an important role in comparative cognitive research, yet slight variations in the experimental settings can substantially change the outcome, questioning whether different memory tests tap into different memory systems or whether they test memory at all. Here, we first assessed memory performance of 16 common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) in two distinct paradigms varying in their format and delay. First, we examined marmoset memory in a 24-h delay memory test (24 h-DMT) in which they could freely explore an environment with three novel objects of which one contained food. We examined their retention the day after, and the procedure was iterated cumulatively with previous objects remaining in the enclosure until the marmosets had to choose the correct out of 30 objects. Second, we administered a classical delayed response test (DRT) in the same animals with three objects and a maximum delay of 30 s. In the DRT, marmoset performance was poor and not better than chance after 15 s already. However, individuals excelled in the 24 h-DMT, performing above chance level after 24 h even with tenfold the number of objects to choose from compared to the DRT. Moreover, individual performances in the two tests were not correlated, and typical age effects on memory could not be detected in both experiments. Together, these results suggest that the two tests explore different domains, and that the 24 h-DMT examines long-term memory. The outcome of the DRT is more difficult to assign to memory since individuals performed only moderately even in the 0-s delay condition. This puts into question whether this task design indeed tests memory or other cognitive processes.

普通狨猴(Callithrix jacchus)在单次空间记忆测试中表现出色,但在经典记忆任务中表现不佳
在量化动物认知时,记忆是测试最多的领域之一,也是理解认知进化的关键。因此,记忆测试在比较认知研究中扮演着重要的角色,然而,实验环境的微小变化可能会大大改变结果,质疑不同的记忆测试是否利用了不同的记忆系统,或者它们是否完全测试了记忆。在此,我们首先评估了16只普通狨猴(Callithrix jacchus)在两种不同格式和延迟的范式下的记忆表现。首先,我们在24小时延迟记忆测试(24 h-DMT)中检测狨猴的记忆,在这个测试中,它们可以自由地探索一个有三个新物体的环境,其中一个包含食物。第二天,我们检查了它们的记忆力,并对之前留在围栏里的物体进行累积迭代,直到狨猴必须从30个物体中选择正确的物体。其次,我们对相同的动物进行了经典延迟反应测试(DRT),有三个物体,最大延迟30秒。在DRT中,绒猴的表现较差,15 s后表现不优于机会。然而,个体在24小时的dmt中表现出色,即使与DRT相比,可选择的对象数量增加了10倍,24小时后的表现也高于机会水平。此外,两个测试中的个体表现不相关,并且在两个实验中都无法检测到典型的年龄对记忆的影响。总之,这些结果表明,这两种测试探索的是不同的领域,而24h - dmt测试的是长期记忆。DRT的结果很难分配给记忆,因为即使在0-s延迟条件下,个体的表现也只有中等水平。这就提出了一个问题,这个任务设计是否真的测试记忆或其他认知过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Animal Cognition
Animal Cognition 生物-动物学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
18.50%
发文量
125
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Animal Cognition is an interdisciplinary journal offering current research from many disciplines (ethology, behavioral ecology, animal behavior and learning, cognitive sciences, comparative psychology and evolutionary psychology) on all aspects of animal (and human) cognition in an evolutionary framework. Animal Cognition publishes original empirical and theoretical work, reviews, methods papers, short communications and correspondence on the mechanisms and evolution of biologically rooted cognitive-intellectual structures. The journal explores animal time perception and use; causality detection; innate reaction patterns and innate bases of learning; numerical competence and frequency expectancies; symbol use; communication; problem solving, animal thinking and use of tools, and the modularity of the mind.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信