Olfactory Stimulation of Monkeys Kevin Campbell Sarah Kolpin Wyatt Potter Heather Shaner Clients: Goran Hellekant, Vicktoria Danilova, Thomas Roberts Advisor: Professor John Webster Title Slide

Overview Problem statement Background information Accomplishments to date Improvement ideas and plans Chosen design alterations Future work Presentation overview Problem Statement: Slide #3 Background Info: Slide #4 Accomplishments to Date: Slides #6 and 7 Improvement plans and ideas: Slides #8, 9, and 10 Chosen design: Slide #11 Future Work: Slide #12 Mention that question and answer session will follow presentation.

Problem Statement Build a device for use in research that compares the ability of young and old monkeys to sense tastes and smells. The device must present interchangeable pairs of stimuli and provide a reward for a correct choice; it must also be readily movable between cages.

Design Objectives and Criteria Flexible stimulus capability Present two clearly distinct options Choice must be final Sensitivity Provide a reward Readily movable between cages Durable, non-corrosive Simple operation-as automated as possible …To present stimuli -- Both tastes and smells Allow monkey to choose between the two. One may be BLANK! Both options must clearly be separate and correlate to a specific stimulus * No “looking behind door #2” or getting a reward for a wrong choice! If he’s right, gets a treat! To facilitate fast and efficient testing of several monkeys Sensitive enough for a monkey’s timid touch, but not so much that it can be tripped accidentally by a random bump or tap. Constructed of metal; something that can be repeatedly washed and sterilized and can withstand abuse from operation and an occasional drop to the floor. Simple for BOTH the monkey to use and for the researcher to reset.

Current Accomplishments Ta Da!!! The Mark-1 prototype (complete with Sarah’s gay 12-inch ruler from God knows where…) Body casing constructed of sheet aluminum. Components of the door-locking mechanism are made of brass. The mounting plate can be seen on the bottom half of the device.

Current Accomplishments Constructed a working prototype Mechanical door-locking mechanism Movable from cage to cage Sized to fit cage Durable construction Door inactivation device Features of the prototype just seen. Door #2 locks out when Door #1 is selected; fits into feeding-tray slot on new, standardized cages; Fits in such a way as to make it easy for the monkey to use; solidly made of aluminum and brass.

Plans for Improvement Short Term: A “Training Device” Switch door setup-hinge on top Eliminate metal ‘lip’ Install an internal divider Training device for use in teaching the monkeys how to operate the device (those 700 exposures we talked about) How to associate door with reward, etc… Complex locking mechanism is NOT crucial at this time… “Short Term” implies by next week… Switch from side-opening to top-opening; Can do this simply by removing old doors and adding new ones. Get rid of the sharp metal ‘lip’ between the bottom edge of each door opening and the floor of the device. Not only can it be dangerous, it can hinder the monkey’s ability to use the device. Add an internal divider to prevent the monkey from reaching through to the other side: say, to the left-side cup from the right side door. They’re smart little buggers!

Plans for Improvement Long Term: “Testing Device” More Automation Electrical locking mechanisms Resetting between trials A “testing device” to actually carry out experiments. “Long Term” meaning well before the end of the semester A new mechanism would be necessary for the new top-hinged door arrangement. BOTH resetting the locking mechanism AND switching stimuli, plus properly placing rewards! “Alternative mechanisms” meaning possible use of electrical components, touch screens, light beams, and/or paddles in place of doors Automation allows for more trials in a shorter period of time with less effort. Also, the presence of an operator can affect the monkey’s behavior and introduce errors into the experiment.

Locking Mechanism Mechanical- Advantages: No electrical demand, easy to fix, high durability Disadvantages: Cumbersome device resetting, moving parts Electrical- Advantages: Simplicity of operation, automatic Disadvantages: Cost, electrical dependance, These are ideas to improve the LONG-TERM (testing) device. Feel free to remove any of these. Should probably pick three to go over with some level of detail (as much as we can spare during an 8-minute presentation)

Electrical Design We found that the overall shape and dimensions were acceptable. Do modifications to create a training device that can go into immediate use. (Move doors, cut off metal lip, add a divider.) Long Term: What do we want to do??? Which avenue (mechanical? Electrical?) do we wish to pursue and why?

Questions ???