Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
The rubber tail task in mice. A, Picture and illustration of the apparatus. Mice were trained to stay in a stainless-steel tube with a cone that had windows on the left and right sides, and a rubber tail was placed on the left or right side of the cone. B, The rubber tail task in Experiment 1. The mice performed daily tests under two conditions: real tails and rubber tails were stroked synchronously or asynchronously. C, Response rates (head movement) when the rubber tail was grasped. The bars indicate the mean response rate under each condition from the responses obtained over 10 d of testing (mice 1–17, synchronous condition, 71.7 ± 6.0 trials; asynchronous condition, 70.6 ± 5.5 trials). Error bars indicate SEM.
- Figure 2.
Control experiments. A, Effects of visual occlusion (Experiment 2). Mice (n = 5) performed daily tests in which the stimuli were always administered synchronously, but under one condition, the rubber tail was occluded by an opaque plastic plate. Response rates of the mice are shown. Bars indicate the mean response rate under each condition from responses obtained over 6 d of testing (mice 2–4, 6, 7, without occlusion condition, 46.6 ± 0.93 trials; with occlusion condition, 47.2 ± 1.6 trials). B, Effects of cross-modal spatial congruence (Experiment 3). Two rubber tails were placed to the right and left sides of the mice. One of these rubber tails was synchronously stroked along with the real tail. Mice (n = 6) performed daily tests under two conditions. Under one condition, the stroked rubber tail was grasped, and under the other, the nonstroked rubber tail was grasped. Mouse response rates are shown (mice 4, 5, 7, 9–11, same side condition, 42.5 ± 4.7 trials; opposite side condition, 43.2 ± 2.1 trials).
