Pattern separation is the process of transforming highly similar sensory inputs into distinct, dissimilar representations. It takes place in the hippocampus and is thought to be used in episodic memory. Impaired pattern separation performance has been recognized as a predictor for the development of cognitive impairments such as dementia in humans and as being present in patients with schizophrenia and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In this protocol, we describe how to implement a simple and robust object pattern separation (OPS) task in mice and rats that we have previously established and validated. This two-trial memory task uses specific object locations so differences in performance can be calibrated with the extent of object movement. Changes in performance are indicative of spatial pattern separation. In contrast to other pattern separation tasks, the OPS task allows detection of spatial pattern separation performance bidirectionally. Furthermore, the OPS task is cheaper and easier to use and interpret than other tasks that use more than two objects or that are touch-screen based. The entire protocol, from vivarium acclimatization to training of the animals, takes ~35–41 d. After successful training, the animals can be tested repeatedly, and three OPS experiments (n = 20–24 per experimental day) can be performed per week. A standard level of expertise in behavioral studies in rodents is sufficient to successfully integrate this paradigm into an existing rodent test battery.
This is a preview of subscription content
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Clelland, C. et al. A functional role for adult hippocampal neurogenesis in spatial pattern separation. Science 325, 210–213 (2009).
Kheirbek, M. A., Klemenhagen, K. C., Sahay, A. & Hen, R. Neurogenesis and generalization: a new approach to stratify and treat anxiety disorders. Nat. Neurosci. 15, 1613–1620 (2012).
Reagh, Z. M. et al. Spatial discrimination deficits as a function of mnemonic interference in aged adults with and without memory impairment. Hippocampus 24, 303–314 (2013).
Schreiber, R. & Newman-Tancredi, A. Improving cognition in schizophrenia with antipsychotics that elicit neurogenesis through 5-HT1A receptor activation. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 110, 72–80 (2014).
Das, T., Ivleva, E. L., Wagner, A. D., Stark, C. E. L. & Tamminga, C. A. Loss of pattern separation performance in schizophrenia suggests dentate gyrus dysfunction. Schizophr. Res. 159, 193–197 (2014).
Tamminga, C. A., Stan, A. D. & Wagner, A. D. The hippocampal formation in schizophrenia. Am. J. Psychiatry 167, 1178–1193 (2010).
Bekinschtein, P. et al. BDNF in the dentate gyrus is required for consolidation of ‘pattern-separated’ memories. Cell Rep. 5, 759–768 (2013).
Oomen, C. A. et al. The touchscreen operant platform for testing working memory and pattern separation in rats and mice. Nat. Protoc. 8, 2006–2021 (2013).
Sahay, A., Wilson, D. A. & Hen, R. Pattern separation: a common function for new neurons in hippocampus and olfactory bulb. Neuron 70, 582–588 (2011).
Lacy, J. W., Yassa, M. A., Stark, S. M., Muftuler, L. T. & Stark, C. E. L. Distinct pattern separation related transfer functions in human CA3/dentate and CA1 revealed using high-resolution fMRI and variable mnemonic similarity. Learn. Mem. 18, 15–18 (2011).
van Goethem, N. P., Schreiber, R., Newman-Tancredi, A., Varney, M. & Prickaerts, J. Divergent effects of the “biased”, 5-HT1A receptor agonists F15599 and F13714 in a novel object pattern separation task. Br. J. Pharmacol. 172, 2532–2543 (2015).
Ennaceur, A. & Delacour, J. A new one-trial test for neurobiological studies of memory in rats. 1: behavioral data. Behav. Brain Res. 31, 47–59 (1988).
Leger, M. et al. Object recognition test in mice. Nat. Protoc. 8, 2531–2537 (2013).
Antunes, M. & Biala, G. The novel object recognition memory: neurobiology, test procedure, and its modifications. Cogn. Process 13, 93–110 (2012).
van Hagen, B. T. J., van Goethem, N. P., Lagatta, D. C. & Prickaerts, J. The object pattern separation (OPS) task; a behavioral paradigm derived from the object recognition task. Behav. Brain Res. 285, 44–52 (2015).
van Goethem, N. P. et al. Object recognition testing: rodent species, strains, housing conditions, and estrous cycle. Behav. Brain Res. 232, 323–334 (2012).
Heyser, J. & Chemero, A. Novel object exploration in mice: not all objects are created equal. Behav. Process. 89, 232–238 (2012).
Prusky, G. T., Harker, K. T., Douglas, R. M. & Whishaw, I. Q. Variation in visual acuity within pigmented, and between pigmented and albino rat strains. Behav. Brain Res. 136, 339–348 (2002).
Roedel, A., Storch, C., Holsboer, F. & Ohl, F. Effects of light or dark phase testing on behavioural and cognitive performance in DBA mice. Lab. Anim. 40, 371–381 (2006).
Akkerman, S. et al. PDE5 inhibition improves object memory in standard housed rats but not in rats housed in an enriched environment: implications for memory models? PLoS ONE 9, e111692 (2014).
Bartolomucci, A. et al. Individual housing induces altered immuno-endocrine responses to psychological stress in male mice. Pyschoneuroendocrinology 28, 540–558 (2003).
Arndt, S. S. et al. Individual housing of mice – impact on behaviour and stress responses. Physiol. Behav. 97, 385–393 (2009).
Castelhano-Carlos, M. J. & Baumans, V. The impact of light, noise, cage cleaning and in-house transport on welfare and stress of laboratory rats. Lab. Anim. 43, 311–327 (2009).
Ameen-Ali, K. E., Eacott, M. J. & Easton, A. A new behavioural apparatus to reduce animal numbers in multiple types of spontaneous object recognition paradigms in rats. J. Neurosci. Methods 211, 66–76 (2012).
Ameen-Ali, K. E., Easton, A. & Eacott, M. J. Moving beyond standard procedures to assess spontaneous recognition memory. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 53, 37–51 (2015).
Albasser, M. M. et al. New behavioral protocols to extend our knowledge of rodent object recognition memory. Learn. Mem. 17, 407–419 (2010).
Kinnavane, L., Albasser, M. M. & Aggleton, J. P. Advances in the behavioural testing and network imaging of rodent recognition memory. Behav. Brain Res. 285, 67–78 (2015).
Sorge, R. E. et al. Olfactory exposure to males, including men, causes stress and related analgesia in rodents. Nat. Methods 11, 629–632 (2014).
Ennaceur, A. One-trial object recognition in rats and mice: methodological and theoretical issues. Behav. Brain Res. 215, 244–254 (2010).
Akkerman, S. et al. Methodological considerations on discrimination and exploration measures in object recognition. Behav. Brain Res. 232, 335–347 (2012).
Bruno, O. et al. GEBR-7b, a novel PDE4D selective inhibitor that improves memory in rodents at non-emetic doses. Br. J. Pharmacol. 164, 2054–2063 (2011).
Vanmierlo, T. et al. Liver X receptor activation restores memory in aged AD mice without reducing amyloid. Neurobiol. Aging 32, 1262–1272 (2009).
Zeef, D. H. et al. Memory deficits in the transgenic rat model of Huntington’s disease. Behav. Brain Res. 227, 194–198 (2012).
Rutten, K. et al. Automated scoring of novel object recognition in rats. J. Neurosci. Methods 171, 72–77 (2008).
Akkerman, S., Prickaerts, J., Steinbusch, H. W. M. & Blokland, A. Object recognition testing: statistical considerations. Behav. Brain Res. 232, 317–322 (2012).
N.P.v.G. is financially supported by Alzheimer Nederland (grant no. WE.03-2017-11).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Key references using this protocol
1. van Hagen, B. T. J. et al. Behav. Brain Res. 285, 44–52 (2015): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2014.10.041
2. van Goethem, N. P. et al. Br. J. Pharmacol. 172, 2532–2543 (2015): https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.13071.
Electronic supplementary material
This Excel file shows scoring of the supplementary video files; output and calculations of the parameters are outlined in the troubleshooting table
An example of a T1 OPS trial of a mouse. Trial duration is 4 min starting immediately upon placement of the mouse in the testing arena. Position 1 is utilized. The same mouse undertaking the T2 trial is shown in Supplementary Video 2 and the scoring and analysis of this trial is shown in the Supplementary Data
An example of a T2 OPS trial of a mouse. Trial duration is 4 min starting immediately upon placement of the mouse in the testing arena. Position 4 is utilized as a novel object location (right object moved backward to position 4). The same mouse undertaking the T1 trial is shown in Supplementary Video 1 and the scoring and analysis of this trial is shown in Supplementary the Data
About this article
Cite this article
van Goethem, N.P., van Hagen, B.T.J. & Prickaerts, J. Assessing spatial pattern separation in rodents using the object pattern separation task. Nat Protoc 13, 1763–1792 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-018-0013-x