Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Hippocampus. 2014 May 5;24(8):963–978. doi: 10.1002/hipo.22283

Figure 5. Familiar environments are much less accurately and reliably represented in APP/TTA mice than controls.

Figure 5

The emerging difference in place cell function noted after 3 days in a novel environment becomes considerably more pronounced after several weeks in a familiar setting. A. Diagram of the linear track used for recording in a familiar environment. Animals were trained on this track every day for 2-3 weeks during tetrode positioning. R: location of food rewards. B. Lap by lap raster plots and rate curves for firing of a representative neuron from each genotype show well-developed place fields in NTG and TTA mice, but poor alignment of activity with position in the APP/TTA animal. C-F. Distribution of spatial information (C), session stability (D), place field length (E), and peak firing rates in place field (F) for each genotype. Median values for the population are shown in the top right corner of each graph. After repeated exposure to the now-familiar track, place cell function in APP/TTA mice was significantly poorer than controls by every measure evaluated (SI, stability, and peak firing rate, p < 0.005; field length p < 0.01). See Table 1 for complete statistical comparisons.