1. Project in Neuroscience and Psychology: Learning and Memory
Team Members: Gillian Bradley, Yuchen Feng, Mary Labowsky, Mike Magaraci, Mason McGill, Ronak Mistry, Rupal Parikh, Purvee Patel, Travis Perlee, Becca Rosen, Doug Wagner, Jasmine Zhuang
Advisor: Dr. Graham Cousens
TA: Jen Sissman

2. Introduction

3. Startle Response What is it? Experimental manipulations.
Odor associated with aversive stimulus  increased acoustic startle?
Odor associated with appetitive stimulus  decreased acoustic startle?

4. The Rat Brain, Olfactory Memory, Odor-Induced Fear

5. Hypothesis
Rats identify amyl acetate as reward  startle response attenuated.
Rats associate cineole with punishment  startle response potentiated or baseline.

6. Methods and Results

7. The Subjects

8. Nose-poke Shaping What is shaping?
To prepare rats for later odor discrimination training.
Sucrose as
incentive to
nose-poke.

9. Odor Preference Amyl acetate or cineole?
Before and after startle response test.
Did rats change their preference after association with loud sound?

10. Ratio of Time Spent in Two Arms (Amyl Acetate / Cineole)
Odor Preference
Ratio of Time Spent in Two Arms (Amyl Acetate / Cineole)
Subject

11. Odor Discrimination Training
Reward and punishment associated with amyl acetate and cineole, respectively.

12. Odor Discrimination

13. Startle Response Test
Sound pulses with three conditions: no odor, amyl acetate, cineole.
No odor  baseline startle response?
Amyl acetate 
startle response
attenuation?
Cineole 
potentiation
or baseline?

14. Startle Response 1 Voltage output of A14 while in Startle Chamber
Time (milliseconds)

15. Startle Response 2

16. Discussion

17. Conclusion Eight of twelve rats were able to discriminate odors.
Startle response successfully measured.
Odors failed to modulate startle response.
Positive odor failed to elicit attenuation.
Negative odor failed to elicit potentiation.
Why?

18. Variables Compared to Previous Research
Schneider & Spanagel (2008)
Proved that a appetitive mentality does attenuate startle.
Different results due to different training
Odors might not have been emotionally charged from our conditioning procedure.

19. Sources of Error Inherent preferences for specific odors Habituation
Relatively small number of subjects
Time- didn’t fully learn association
Appetitive motivation- odor not emotionally charged
Habituation- gradually
Testing procedure: rats unable to switch between odors in the given time to alter emotional state

20. Applications of Project
More detailed understanding of the brain
Better understanding of behavioral and mental disorders
Emotion analysis

21. Thank You! The Dorr Foundation
The Edward W. and Stella C. Van Houten Memorial Fund
The Jennifer A. Chalsty Foundation
The Jewish Communal Fund
Laura and John Overdeck
NJGSS Alumnae and Parents ( )
Novartis
Schering-Plough Foundation
Dr. Graham Cousens
Dr. David Miyamoto
Dr. Paul Quinn
Dr. Steve Surace
Myrna Papier
Jen Sissman
And everyone who has helped make this experience possible.

22. Our Team

23. Questions?