Animal Cognition

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 359–368 | Cite as

Rats build and update topological representations through exploration

  • Alice Alvernhe
  • Francesca Sargolini
  • Bruno Poucet
Original Paper

Abstract

Although rats are able to build complex spatial representations of their surroundings during exploration, the nature of the encoded information is still a matter for debate. In particular, it is not well established if rats can process the topological structure of the environment in such a way that they are aware of the connections existing between remote places. Here, rats were first exposed for four 5-min trials to a complex environment divided into several sectors that were separated by doors allowing either unrestricted or restricted access to other sectors. In the fifth test trial, we measured the behavior of the animals while they explored the same environment in which, however, they faced changes that either altered or did not alter the topological structure of the environment. In experiment 1, closing previously opened doors prevented the rat from having direct access between corresponding sectors. In experiment 2, opening previously closed doors allowed direct access between sectors that had not been directly accessible. In each experiment, control doors allowed us to discard the mere influence of door manipulation. We compared the rats’ exploratory behavior in response to door manipulations that either strongly altered or did not alter the ability to commute between sectors and found evidence that the animals displayed differential reactions to the two types of door manipulations. This implies that during exploration rats build a precise map of the connectivity of space that can be flexibly updated and used for efficient navigation.

Keywords

Spatial representation Exploration Topology Rat 

References

  1. Alvernhe A, Van Cauter T, Save E, Poucet B (2008) Different CA1 and CA3 representations of novel routes in a shortcut situation. J Neurosci 28:7324–7333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvernhe A, Save E, Poucet B (2011) Local remapping of place cell firing in the Tolman detour task. Eur J Neurosci 33:1696–1705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burgess N (2006) Spatial memory: how egocentric and allocentric combine. Trends Cogn Sci 10:551–557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng K (2008) Whither geometry? Troubles of the geometric module. Trends Cogn Sci 12:355–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng K, Spetch ML (1998) Mechanisms of landmark use in mammals and birds. In: Healy S (ed) Spatial representation in animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  6. Deutsch JA (1960) The structural basis of behavior. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Eichenbaum H (2001) The hippocampus and declarative memory: cognitive mechanisms and neural codes. Behav Brain Res 127:199–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gallistel CR (1990) The organization of learning. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Lever C, Burton S, O’Keefe J (2006) Rearing on hind legs, environmental novelty, and the hippocampal formation. Rev Neurosci 17:111–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lew AR (2011) Looking beyond the boundaries: time to put landmarks back on the cognitive map? Psychol Bull 137:484–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Muller RU, Stead M, Pach J (1996) The hippocampus as a cognitive graph. J Gen Physiol 107:663–694PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. O’Keefe J, Nadel L (1978) Hippocampus as a cognitive map. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Poucet B (1984) Evaluation of connectedness by cats in path-selection problems. Percept Mot Skills 58:51–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Poucet B (1993) Spatial cognitive maps in animals: new hypotheses on their structure and neural mechanisms. Psychol Rev 100:163–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Poucet B, Benhamou S (1997) The neuropsychology of spatial cognition in the rat. Crit Rev Neurobiol 11:101–120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Poucet B, Herrmann T (2001) Exploratory patterns of rats on a complex maze provide evidence for topological coding. Behav Proc 53:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Poucet B, Chapuis N, Durup M, Thinus-Blanc C (1986) A study of exploratory behaviour as an index of spatial knowledge in hamsters. Anim Learn Behav 14:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Poucet B, Bolson B, Herrmann T (1990) Spatial behavior of septal and normal rats on alternate route maze problems. Q J Exp Psychol 42B:369–384Google Scholar
  19. Save E, Poucet B, Foreman N, Buhot MC (1992) Object exploration and reactions to spatial and non spatial changes in hooded rats following damage to parietal cortex or dorsal hippocampus. Behav Neurosci 106:447–456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schmajuk NA, Thieme AD (1992) Purposive behavior and cognitive mapping: a neural network model. Biol Cybern 67:165–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schmajuk NA, Thieme AD, Blair HT (1993) Maps, routes, and the hippocampus: a neural network approach. Hippocampus 3:387–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thinus-Blanc C, Bouzouba L, Chaix C, Chapuis N, Durup M, Poucet B (1987) A study of spatial parameters encoded during exploration in hamsters. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 13:418–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Trullier O, Meyer JA (2000) Animat navigation using a cognitive graph. Biol Cybern 83:271–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vauclair J (1980) Etude ontogénétique de l’exploration chez le Hamster doré. Behaviour 73:205–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yeap WK, Jefferies ME (1999) Computing a representation of the local environment. Artif Intell 107:265–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alice Alvernhe
    • 1
    • 2
  • Francesca Sargolini
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bruno Poucet
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Neurobiologie de la CognitionCNRS—Aix-Marseille Université, UMR 6155MarseilleFrance
  2. 2.Laboratoire de Neurobiologie de la CognitionUniversité de Provence, UMR 6155Marseille cedex 03France

Personalised recommendations