$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

Figure 2: The 5-CSRTT apparatus used for the current study. The apparatus runs on a laptop equipped with the 5-CSRTT toolbox, which provides a script for controlling the microcontroller and all related equipment and multiple scripts for controlling the 5-CSRTT experiment. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The fully customizable toolbox is easy to use and based on a single-board microcontroller and standard electrotechnical components. Figure 3 shows a simplified circuit and wiring diagram. The whole aperture consists of 5 LEDs as the light stimuli and five infrared sensors to detect nose pokes. The house light consists of one strip with eight LEDs, and the food magazine is made out of an aperture with a flap door with a micro switch, a motor-driven pellet dispenser, and a strip with eight LEDs for lighting. The circuit also exemplifies connections for optional components such as the passive buzzer speaker for auditory feedback and a digital potentiometer for volume adjustment. For a list of the equipment used in developing this toolbox, please see Table of Materials.

Figure 3: Simplified circuit of the microcontroller hardware. To be easily and quickly customizable, the microcontroller equipment is connected via a breadboard. From top left to bottom left, clockwise: A microcontroller board is connected to a motor shield and a DC motor (representing the pellet dispenser motor). To the right are the LED strips for both the house and food magazine lights, and in the middle are all five white LEDs for the stimulus light and the five infrared sensor pairs used in the apertures. Below the microcontroller board is a simple microswitch (representing the switch used in the food magazine flap door). Finally, a passive buzzer speaker and a digital potentiometer are depicted in the middle. This image was made using the open-source software Fritzing. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Linkage and functions of all components of the experiment control scripts and simplified diagram of the "Code" function. (A) The "User" script sends its parameters to the "Code" function, which in turn links directly to the "Staircase" function, allowing it to update any parameter used in the "Code" function while the experiment is ongoing. The "Code" function then sends its results to the "DataProc" function at the end of the session. (B) Before starting an experiment session, the "Code" function first checks whether it is supposed to start the habituation protocol. If not, it sets up the parameters based on the definitions chosen in the "User" script. Before each trial begins, the function then checks whether the ESC key on the keyboard was pressed. If not, it continues with a new trial. Otherwise, it stops the experiment session and passes the gathered data to the DataProc function. This critical check before each trial start allows the program to stop before any chosen time limit is reached. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Interactions between the different experiment control scripts can be seen in Figure 4A. The "User" script includes all the parameters that define the experiment. There, variables that determine the experiment's timing, number and brightness of illuminated stimuli, ITI duration, and the like can be freely chosen. The Code function (Supplementary File 5) includes a detailed description of a single trial and all possible outcomes, which is reiterated throughout the experiment, as shown in Figure 4B. Moreover, it consists of a protocol for the habituation of the animal to the apparatus. The Code function also regularly checks the performance of the animal. Furthermore, the Staircase function is optional. The subject's performance is compared to previously set criteria, and desired parameters are automatically updated if the animal's performance meets these criteria. The Staircase function may also consider the acquired results from the previous day's session. While the experiment is running, a performance check at the end of a trial will calculate accuracy, omissions, and the total number of correct responses of the completed trials and compare the outcome with desired criteria for a level update, as specified in the Staircase function. Finally, the DataProc function processes all the gathered data and generates simple graphs for quick analysis. At the end of a session, the toolbox automatically saves all the data into a *.mat file and generates an extra *.xlsx file with the essential information from the experiment.

Figure 5: Example of different stimulus configurations of the 5-CSRTT toolbox. The diagram exemplifies possible combinations of target stimuli in dependence on the chosen configuration. Both the "all" and "single" configurations are used in the standard paradigm (for the habituation and behavioral experiment). The "neighbour" and "shifted" configurations show non-standard stimulus configurations, allowing the use of other numbers of lit stimuli, which may also have a different contrast than the target stimulus. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Protocol step 4.2.7.7 mentions an optional feature: changing the grouping of target apertures. The standard 5-CSRTT paradigm makes use of one single target stimulus. Here, we exemplify how the toolbox presented allows for modifications of the standard paradigm. Figure 5 displays some possible group combinations out of a total of five apertures concerning the chosen configuration. The "all" configuration lights up all the available apertures so that each aperture is now a target aperture, which can be helpful in the initial training stages. The neighbour configuration makes sure that the (freely chosen) number of target apertures will be neighboring each other. Settings can be specified such that the neighbors will not be identical with the target aperture but be illuminated at lower (or even higher) contrast. The use of apertures with different illumination contrasts allows for testing new paradigms, such as using differently graded rewards for nose-pokes in the high- or low-contrast apertures. Figure 5 shows an example with three target apertures with identical illumination. The single configuration is typically used in the standard 5-CSRTT, where only a single target is illuminated. Finally, the shifted configuration extends the neighbor configuration. It shifts the neighbor stimulus toward the last or first aperture in case the target aperture is at the first or last position, respectively. As in the neighbor configuration, the illumination strength of the neighbors can be freely chosen, being either the same or different from the target aperture. Also, the number of overall lit stimuli can be freely chosen. The toolbox then computes all possible stimuli automatically. However, the parameter "Config.LED.NumHighLED" must be set to "1" for this configuration.
Following the protocol, the training of rats (N = 10) for the 5-CSRTT was performed according to the training stages presented in Table 1.
Table 1: 5-CSRTT training schedule and criteria to move to the next level. (A) The inter-trial interval was kept constant at 5 s in every training level. (B) Stimulus duration for every training level. (C) Limited Hold (LH) time window, the maximum time tolerated between stimulus off and any nose-poke response. (D) The total number of correct responses needed to pass the respective training level. (E) The accuracy percentage is calculated as
. (F) Percentage of omission errors is defined as
. This criterion does not include premature responses. Please click here to download this Table.
The performance of the rats was compared to the number of training days (sessions) required to complete each training level given in Table 1. All the animals started at training level 1 with an StD and LH of 60 s each. However, some rats (N = 5) received enhanced habituation training to test some of the additional stimulus options reported earlier, which explains the difference in the number of sessions the individual animals stayed in training level 1. Completion of the level was marked by reaching a total of 30 or more correct responses. StD and LH decreased during the following levels, while the criteria for advancing to the next training level got tougher, increasing the attentional demand of the task1,6.
Table 2 shows the automatically generated *.xlsx spreadsheet of one example rat during one session. The rat started with the configuration specified in training level 5. After four trials, the rat advanced to level 6, considering the trials performed in the current session plus the accuracy achieved in the previous session. How many trials have to be performed at a minimum in the current session to advance to the next training level is specified in the variable "Config.Experiment.MinNumTrials". In the same session, the rat advanced to training level 7 after completing 66 trials in level 6 and achieving the requirement of > 80% accuracy and < 20% omission. In total, rats were trained for 26 days using the configuration of training levels as provided in Table 1. The number of sessions spent per training level is provided in Figure 6A. The black line shows the average across all subjects, and each colored line displays the data of one rat. All rats reached the eighth level within 14-22 sessions (Figure 6B). Figure 6C shows the mean performance of subjects per training level and across all training days in the 5-CSRTT apparatus. The dashed black line represents the accuracy percentage, and the straight black line represents the omission percentage. Accuracy was calculated as the ratio between the number of correct responses and the total number of responses. Omissions were calculated as the ratio between the number of omissions and the total number of trials (i.e., the sum of correct responses, incorrect responses, and omissions). The gray line indicates the average total number of correct responses across all trials in each level. Figure 6D displays the final accuracy achieved by each subject on the eighth and final training level.
On average, rats spent 5.9 (±1.03 SEM) sessions to complete level 1, between 1.5 (±0.17) and 3.5 (±0.5) sessions to complete level 2 to 6, and 1.7 (±0.16) sessions to complete level 7 before they reached the final level 8. As is evident from Figure 6A, the variance between subjects was most significant in the initial levels (SD = 3.25 in level 1, 1.58 in level 2) and decreased in later levels (0.47 and 0.48 in levels 6 and 7, respectively). In level 4, when the stimulus duration was further reduced, the average number of sessions spent (2.6 ± 0.52), and variance between rats (1.64) increased, with two rats taking 5 and 6 days to conclude the level.

Figure 6: Results of the behavioral experiment with the 5-CSRTT toolbox. (A) The number of sessions performed at each training level. The black line depicts the average number of sessions of all subjects for each level (mean ± SEM), and colored lines represent individual subjects' data. (B) The absolute number of sessions needed to reach the final level, per subject. (C) Averaged performance measures throughout training (mean ± SEM). The dotted black line depicts the accuracy of all subjects across all given responses in all sessions per training level, and the black line shows the corresponding omission percentage. The gray line depicts the average absolute number of correct answers of all subjects at each training level. (D) Accuracy per subject during the eighth and final training level. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Table 2: Gathered data from one example rat during one training session. Column A displays the trial count over the session regarding the current training level, as shown in column B. Column C displays the ITI duration, and column D displays the trial start time. Columns E to I show the brightness level for the LED stimulus in apertures 1 to 5, respectively. A brightness level of 0 means the stimulus was off, and a brightness level of 0.2 means the stimulus was turned on with 20% of its maximal intensity. Columns J and K show the exact time the stimulus was turned on and off, respectively. Column L displays the outcome of the trial: 0 means "omission", 1 means "correct response", 3 means "incorrect response" (nose poke into non-target aperture) and 4 means "premature". Column M shows which aperture was nose-poked during the trial, while column N depicts the exact time of the nose-poke. Columns O, P, and Q show the time when the pellet dispenser motor was turned on, the corresponding motor number, and the time when the rat opened the pellet dispenser to get its reward, respectively. Column R displays the trial end time. Columns S, T, U, V, and W show the total number of premature responses, timeouts, panel pushes during an ITI, the total number of perseverative answers, and the total runtime of the session in minutes, respectively. Please click here to download this Table.
Supplementary File 1: Script for the hardware control of the IDE software (Arduino code). This includes all commands to control the hardware and electrotechnical components of the toolbox. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 2: Script for the function "User" in the experiment control software. This includes all the parameters that define the experiment. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 3: Script for the function "Staircase" in the experiment control software. This monitors the subject's performance and compares it to the previously set criteria. The desired parameters are automatically updated if the animal's performance meets these criteria. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 4: Script for the function "DataProc" in the experiment control software. This processes all the gathered data and generates simple graphs for quick analysis. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 5: Script for the "Code" function. This includes a detailed description of a single trial and all the possible outcomes, which is reiterated throughout the experiment. Please click here to download this File.