Cited by 120Memory and Neural MechanismsSpatial Cognition and NavigationCognitive Abilities and Testing

Place and matching-to-place spatial learning affected by rat inbreeding (Dark–Agouti, Fischer 344) and albinism (Wistar, Sprague–Dawley) but not domestication (wild rat vs. Long–Evans, Fischer–Norway)

Troy Harker, K, Whishaw, Ian Q·2002·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

Domestication has been shown to produce a shift in both morphological and behavioral characteristics of animals. While changes in body weight, brain size, reproductive rates, and temperament are well documented, the effects of domestication on learning and memory are not as clearly understood. This issue is of particular importance to the use of rodent models in learning and memory where the domestication of Rattus norvegicus for research has resulted in the availability of numerous strains. To investigate cognitive effects resulting frm domestication, we examined the spatial performance of a number of rat strains: wild, Long-Evans, Fischer-Norway, Dark-Agouti, Wistar, Fischer 344, Sprague-Dawley. The wild rats served as a baseline for comparing inbred and outbred domestic strains and pigmented and albino domestic strains. Place (a measure of nonspatial and procedural learning), matching-to-place (spatial working memory), and probe (retention) performance were measured in the Morris swimming pool task. The task is an ideal means for comparing different rat strains because place learning has not been selected for in the domestication of Rattus norvegicus and because the task is ethologically relevant. The results indicated that wild rats and Long-Evans rats did not differ on any measure, with Fischer-Norway rats being only slightly inferior. Larger impairments were found in Wistar > Fischer 344 > Dark-Agouti > Sprague-Dawley strains. Impairments were more obvious on place acqu…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0166-4328(02)00083-9

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cognitive capacity has been shown to be affected by inbreeding in humans and rats.

    “which has been shown to be affected by inbreeding in humans [32] and rats [33]”

    From ‘Out of tune’: consequences of inbreeding on bird song (2016) · cites this paper as [33]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Troy Harker, K., & Whishaw, I. Q.
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-08
Volume
134
Issue
1-2
Pages
467-477
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035328388
Cited by
120
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Stroke Network
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
domestication, inbreeding, albinism, spatial learning, place learning, spatial working memory, Morris water maze, rat strains, Long-Evans rats, wild rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Wild, Cues, Female, Inbreeding, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Rats, Inbred F344, Rats, Inbred Strains, Space Perception, Swimming, Visual Acuity, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats, Wistar, Maze Learning, Rats, Long-Evans, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review