Auditory discrimination learning and knowledge transfer in mice depends on task difficulty.
Mice reproduce interesting effects in auditory discrimination learning and knowledge transfer discussed in human studies: (i) the advantage in the transfer from a hard to an easy task by benefits from transfer of procedural knowledge and information-integration learning, and (ii) the disadvantage in the transfer from easy to hard tasks by inability to generalize across perceptually different classes of stimuli together with initially unsuccessful attempts to transfer cognitive skills from one task to the other. House mice (NMRI strain) were trained in a shuttle-box stimulus discrimination task. They had to discriminate either between two pure tones of different frequencies (PT) or between two different modulation frequencies of an amplitude-modulated tone (AM). Then transfer of knowledge between these two tasks was tested. Mice rapidly learned PT discrimination within two to three training sessions (easy task). AM discrimination learning took longer and did not reach the high performance level of PT discrimination (hard task). No knowledge transfer was detected in animals first trained with the easy (PT) followed by the hard (AM) discrimination task. Mice benefited, however, from knowledge transfer when the AM discrimination was followed by the PT discrimination. When the task changed, confusion of conditioned stimuli occurred if the carrier frequency of the AM was the same as one of the frequencies in the PT task. These results show a hard-to-easy effect when possible knowledge transfer is tested between qualitatively different stimulus classes. The data establish mice as promising animal model for research on genetics of auditory perception and learning.
Kurt
Simone
S
Institute of Neurobiology, University of Ulm, D-89081 Ulm, Germany. simone.kurt@uni-ulm.de
Ehret
Günter
G
D000818:Animals; D001307:Auditory Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D004193:Discrimination Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D051379:Mice
Neurosci Lett. 1999 Feb 12;261(1-2):13-6
10081915
Hear Res. 1992 Jul;60(2):115-42
1639723
Percept Psychophys. 2005 May;67(4):691-8
16134462
Hear Res. 2003 Oct;184(1-2):41-50
14553902
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 May 6;105(18):6753-8
18436653
Brain Res. 1968 Aug 26;10(2):168-82
5693232
Nature. 2001 Aug 16;412(6848):733-6
11507640
Behav Neural Biol. 1983 Sep;39(1):78-104
6661145
Learn Mem. 2003 Mar-Apr;10(2):141-7
12663752
Psychol Rev. 1998 Jul;105(3):442-81
9697427
Science. 1969 Jan 10;163(3863):139-49
5762759
Naturwissenschaften. 1974 Nov;61(11):506-7
4449570
Percept Psychophys. 2002 Apr;64(3):426-36
12049283
Neurosci Lett. 2002 Aug 23;329(1):37-40
12161257
J Comp Psychol. 2008 May;122(2):132-45
18489229
Behav Brain Res. 1998 Mar;91(1-2):29-39
9578437
J Neurosci. 2007 Mar 7;27(10):2663-72
17344404
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1997 Aug;7(4):530-5
9287202
Ear Hear. 1996 Jun;17(3 Suppl):51S-65S
8807276
Neuroreport. 2006 Jun 26;17(9):853-6
16738475
J Aud Res. 1979 Jan;19(1):37-40
551102
J Acoust Soc Am. 1985 Sep;78(3):1118-20
4031256
Psychol Sci. 2008 Nov;19(11):1169-77
19076490
Learn Mem. 1999 Jul-Aug;6(4):347-62
10509706
J Acoust Soc Am. 2002 Mar;111(3):1377-88
11931315
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Feb 12;364(1515):301-11
18977731