|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
|
Fig. 3. Operantly conditioned semi-intact preparations demonstrated learning and
long-term memory, but yoked and naïve preparations did not. The number of
openings (and total breathing time for controls) were assessed during each
session. (A) Conditioned preparations showed a significant reduction in
attempted pneumostome openings when comparing session 1 to 4 (learning;
t=3.583, P<0.01) and session 1 to the memory test (LTM;
t=3.539, P<0.01). In addition, there was also a
significant reduction in attempted pneumostome openings in the conditioned
group between session 1 and 2 (t=3.280, P<0.01).
**P<0.01. (B) A two-way RM-ANOVA demonstrated that the
number of pneumostome openings in yoked (grey bars) and naïve
preparations (white bars) remained unchanged across the training sessions and
in the memory test 18 h later (P>0.05 for treatment, sessions and
interaction effects). There was no significant difference in number of
openings in Session 1 across all three groups (P>0.05). (C)
Although the total breathing time of yoked preparations was lower than that of
the naïve preparations (F(1,18)=5.879,
P<0.05) there was no significant decline in the total breathing
time within each treatment group when comparing session 1 to 4 (yoked:
t=0.0303, P>0.05; naïve: t=1.115,
P>0.05) and session 1 to the memory test (yoked: t
=0.401, P>0.05; naïve: t=0.7139,
P>0.05).
|
