Behavioral Mazes

Visual X Maze (ViS4M)

SKU CS-958369
$4,990.00
IncludesStandard care

X-shaped four-arm maze with programmable LED illumination for visual discrimination learning and spatial memory assessment in mice and rats.

Species SKU CS-958369
$4,990.00
Scientist guidance
Louise Corscadden, PhD, Director of Science

Louise Corscadden, PhD

Director of Science · ConductScience

Ask Louise about Visual X Maze (ViS4M) fit, setup, configuration, or quote prep.

Key Specifications

Full details →
Model fit
Mouse, Rat
SKU family
CS-958369
Sizing
Mouse Size: Total length x 45 cm · Total width x 10 cm; Rat Size: Total length x 58 cm · Total width x 13 cm
Ordering
Online checkout and quote request available
Category
Behavioral Mazes
Build notes
Acrylic, Black acrylic, glass
Category: Behavioral Mazes

Track rodents with ConductVision

ConductVision is our video-tracking software. Record your sessions on video, and it scores standard rodent tests, such as those listed below.

Examples of tests it scores

To check whether ConductVision scores your protocol in this apparatus, ask in your quote request.

Add ConductVision to your quote

ConductVision

$1,490 per year

A 5-year license is $3,990 in total.

Results export as CSV files.

Request the free ConductVision demo for Windows
Ask a question

Have a question? Just ask.

Send it over and we'll email you a personalized answer — no call, no scheduling.

Personalized email reply
Usually within one business day
Helpful answers published here

Prefer to talk it through?

Ask your question

Type it below and we'll email you a personalized answer — no meeting required.

We'll only use your email to send your answer; broadly useful answers may be published anonymously.

Accessories

Enhance your setup with compatible accessories

Total: $0.00

Frequently Bought Together

Total: $2,730.00

Creator Insights

Maya Koronyo-HamaouiCo-invented the Visual-stimuli Four-arm Maze (ViS4M)Cedars-Sinai Medical Center — Departments of Neurosurgery and Biomedical Sciences, Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Research Institute

About the Creator

Maya Koronyo-Hamaoui is a neuroscientist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center whose laboratory studies the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease, with an emphasis on early visual and retinal markers of neurodegeneration. Working with neurosurgeon Keith L. Black and researcher Yosef Koronyo at the Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Research Institute, she addressed the observation that color and contrast deficits — documented clinically but understudied in preclinical mouse models — needed a dedicated behavioral assay. The team conceived and patented the Visual-stimuli Four-arm Maze (ViS4M), an LED-equipped, X-shaped apparatus that uses spontaneous exploration to quantify color discrimination, contrast sensitivity, and spatial alternation without reward conditioning. In subsequent characterization (Vit, Fuchs et al., 2021), APP/PS1 Alzheimer’s-model mice showed visual alternation deficits in the maze, illustrating its use for studying vision-linked cognition in disease models.

To view Maya Koronyo-Hamaoui’s publications, visit PubMed.

Are you Maya Koronyo-Hamaoui? to review your photo and bio, and find out how to submit Creator Insights.

ConductScience celebrates method creators: researchers who, through rigorous and often ingenious experiments, develop the tools that reveal how the brain and body work. These are real scientific discoveries that become everyday instruments for the labs that follow.

Foundational papers
  1. Vit, J. P., Fuchs, D. T., Angel, A., Levy, A., Lamensdorf, I., Black, K. L., Koronyo, Y., & Koronyo-Hamaoui, M. (2021). Color and contrast vision in mouse models of aging and Alzheimer’s disease using a novel visual-stimuli four-arm maze. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1255. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-80988-0
  2. Vit, J. P., Fuchs, D. T., Angel, A., Levy, A., Lamensdorf, I., Black, K. L., Koronyo, Y., & Koronyo-Hamaoui, M. (2021). Visual-stimuli four-arm maze test to assess cognition and vision in mice. Bio-protocol, 11(22), e4234. doi:10.21769/BioProtoc.4234

Use this apparatus with

The complete Visual X Maze workflow

Track behavior

No exact ConductVision support page is currently published for Visual X Maze; keep this as a roadmap gap rather than linking to a guessed URL.

Supporting page not yet built

Run protocol

Stepwise visual-cue choice setup, trial timing, exclusion rules, and reporting checkpoints.

ConductMaze Visual X Maze Protocol ->

Analyze output

No exact calculator page is currently published for Visual X Maze; keep this as a roadmap gap rather than linking to a guessed URL.

Supporting page not yet built

Configuration considerations

Common Visual X Maze setup decisions

Use these notes to scope species, cohort, tracking, and automation needs. Only verified product or support routes are linked from this section.

This productStandard

Visual X Maze

Four-choice X-shaped maze with visual cue or arm-discrimination options

visual discrimination, route choice, cue learning, and flexible arm selection.

Quote

Request Quote
BuyableScaled option

Visual X Maze Species Variant

Mouse, rat, aquatic, insect, or large-animal scaling as appropriate

Use species-specific dimensions and lighting so the apparatus tests the intended construct instead of body size, visibility, or handling tolerance.

Quote

View options ->
SpecialtyAutomation

Visual X Maze With Tracking

Camera, gates, sensors, cue control, or event logging as required

Best when the protocol needs reproducible timing, high-throughput scoring, or defensible endpoint extraction across cohorts.

Quote

Request automation help

§ 1

Introduction

The Visual X Maze is a choice and decision assay built around visual discrimination, route choice, cue learning, and flexible arm selection. Interpretable data depend on matching the apparatus geometry, subject species, trial structure, and scoring rules to the behavioral construct under study. 1

Visual-cue choice protocols depend on stable geometry, consistent trial timing, and pre-defined scoring rules. Without those controls, correct choices can be shifted by motivation, locomotion, light level, odor, cue salience, or handling rather than the intended behavioral construct. 1

This methods section summarizes setup, endpoint definitions, common confounds, sample output, adjacent assays, and reporting details needed to evaluate Visual X Maze results alongside the product specifications. 1

§ 2

Methods

2.1 Procedure

Visual-cue choice with standardized setup, trial timing, and endpoint extraction.

Pre-test setup

  1. 1.Define construct: Pre-register whether the study uses Visual X Maze for choice and decision behavior, screening, cohort comparison, or apparatus validation.
  2. 2.Calibrate apparatus: Verify four-choice x-shaped maze with visual cue or arm-discrimination options, visibility, lighting, surface condition, cue placement, and camera field of view before animals enter the room.
  3. 3.Set scoring rules: Define correct choices, omissions, exclusions, latency cutoffs, and event thresholds before acquisition starts.
  4. 4.Control carryover: Use consistent cleaning, handling, acclimation, and inter-trial timing so odor, stress, and fatigue do not become hidden treatment variables.

Trial sequence

  1. 1.Start trial: Place the subject at the protocol-defined start location and begin synchronized video or event logging.
  2. 2.Record behavior: Capture correct choices, path order, latency, dwell time, and relevant zone or arm events throughout the trial.1
  3. 3.Apply endpoint rules: Score only committed entries or events that meet the pre-defined body-position and timing criteria.
  4. 4.End and reset: Stop at the maximum duration, completion criterion, or humane endpoint, then clean and reset the apparatus.
  5. 5.Export QC: Review tracking loss, outlier latency, immobility, omissions, and apparatus notes before group-level analysis.

Critical methodological constraints

  • Cue salience. Document cue salience because it can shift correct choices independent of the intended construct.
  • Side bias. Keep side bias stable across cohorts and sessions.
  • Lighting. Audit lighting before interpreting group differences.
  • Motivation. Report motivation when it changes engagement, exploration, or measurable trial completion.
  • Visual acuity. Flag visual acuity during QA because it often explains apparent assay failure.2

2.2 Measurement & Analysis

Core Visual X Maze endpoints for behavioral interpretation and apparatus quality control.

Correct choices

Cue-guided accuracy

Correct choices is the primary endpoint for this page and should be paired with latency and quality-control flags.1

Choice latency

Latency and initiation

Choice latency helps distinguish task performance from motivation, freezing, fatigue, or handling effects.

Cue-arm sequence

Spatial or zone strategy

Cue-arm sequence captures how the subject solved the task, not only whether it reached the endpoint.

Omissions

Engagement control

Omissions identifies omissions, low exploration, sensor dropouts, or species-specific non-response.

Cue visibility issues

Quality-control flag

Cue visibility issues should be reviewed before exporting final group summaries.

+ Additional metrics: trial duration, zone dwell, event count, path efficiency, tracking confidence, exclusions, and session-level notes.

2.3 correct choices ratio (analysis)

A compact percentage summary for Visual X Maze output.

Inline calculator

Type the values your tracker recorded.

Correct choices ratio

75.0%

Formula: correct choices / (correct choices + incorrect choices) x 100. Interpret with latency, engagement, and confound checks before making construct-level claims. 1

§ 3

Results

PubMed publication counts, sample apparatus output, and recent papers from a dated PubMed snapshot.

3.1 Publication trends

PubMed volume and co-occurring behavioral methods for Visual X Maze studies.

Figure 1 · Visual X Maze publications by year (PubMed)

Papers per year that match this paradigm's PubMed search.

2000201020202026 to date: 0 papers

Total in PubMed: 75 papers. PubMed snapshot taken 2026-09-25.

3.2 Sample apparatus output

Representative Visual X Maze output for methods review and endpoint interpretation.

Table 1 · Per-animal Visual X Maze scoring output

AnimalGroupCorrect choicesChoice latencyCue-arm sequenceSummary
VXM-001Control194 scue-left79.2%
VXM-002Control175 scue-right70.8%
VXM-003Impaired119 sside-biased45.8%
VXM-004Impaired1011 srandom41.7%

Synthetic example for illustration only. Replace with tracked output screenshots or exported data when product media are available.

3.3 Recent findings (PubMed)

  • Intersection of hippocampus and spinal cord: a focus on the hippocampal alpha-synuclein accumulation, dopaminergic receptors, neurogenesis, and cognitive function following spinal cord injury in male rats.

    Kalkhoran AK, Alipour MR, Jafarzadehgharehziaaddin M, et al.. BMC Neurosci. 2022 Jul 12.

    Following Spinal Cord Injury (SCI), innumerable inflammatory and degenerative fluctuations appear in the injured site, and even remotely in manifold areas of the brain.

  • Effects of subchronic dietary exposure to the engineered nanomaterials SiO2 and CeO2 in C57BL/6J and 5xFAD Alzheimer model mice.

    Sofranko A, Wahle T, Kolling J, et al.. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2022 Mar 25.

    There is an increasing concern about the neurotoxicity of engineered nanomaterials (NMs).

  • Visual-stimuli Four-arm Maze test to Assess Cognition and Vision in Mice.

    Vit JP, Fuchs DT, Angel A, et al.. Bio Protoc. 2021 Nov 20.

    Visual impairments, notably loss of contrast sensitivity and color vision, were documented in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients yet are critically understudied.

  • Evaluation of the neurotoxic effects of engineered nanomaterials in C57BL/6J mice in 28-day oral exposure studies.

    Sofranko A, Wahle T, Heusinkveld HJ, et al.. Neurotoxicology. 2021 May.

    In recent years, concerns have emerged about the potential neurotoxic effects of engineered nanomaterials (NMs). Titanium dioxide and silver are among the most widely used types of metallic NMs.

  • Evaluation of neurological effects of cerium dioxide nanoparticles doped with different amounts of zirconium following inhalation exposure in mouse models of Alzheimer's and vascular disease.

    Wahle T, Sofranko A, Dekkers S, et al.. Neurochem Int. 2020 Sep.

    Increasing evidence from toxicological and epidemiological studies indicates that the brain is an important target for ambient (ultrafine) particles. Disturbance of redox-homeostasis and inflammation in the brain are proposed as possible mechanisms that can contribute to neurotoxic and neurodegenerative effects.

  • Intermittent Hypoxic Conditioning Alleviates Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder-Induced Damage and Dysfunction of Rat Visceral Organs and Brain.

    Manukhina EB, Tseilikman VE, Karpenko MN, et al.. Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Jan 5.

    Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) causes mental and somatic diseases. Intermittent hypoxic conditioning (IHC) has cardio-, vaso-, and neuroprotective effects and alleviates experimental PTSD. IHC's ability to alleviate harmful PTSD effects on rat heart, liver, and brain was examined.

View all 75 matching papers on PubMed →

§ 4

Discussion

Limitations of the paradigm, methodological caveats, and current directions.

4.1 Common confounds

Variables that can shift Visual X Maze results apart from the effect under study.

Cue salience

Cue salience can change apparent Visual X Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Side bias

Side bias can change apparent Visual X Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Lighting

Lighting can change apparent Visual X Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Motivation

Motivation can change apparent Visual X Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Visual acuity

Visual acuity can change apparent Visual X Maze performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

4.2 Construct validity caveats

Visual X Maze is strongest when endpoint definitions, apparatus settings, and exclusion rules are specified before testing. Treat a single summary metric as a screening signal, then confirm interpretation with latency, engagement, comparator assays, and quality-control review. 1

4.3 Special considerations

When should I choose Visual X Maze?

Choose Visual X Maze when the research question matches visual discrimination, route choice, cue learning, and flexible arm selection. and the lab can control cue salience, side bias, and trial timing.

What setup variables should be specified before testing?

Specify species, cohort size, apparatus dimensions, lighting, tracking method, automation level, cleaning workflow, endpoint definitions, and exclusion criteria before data collection begins.

What makes the data interpretable?

Interpretation is strongest when the apparatus configuration, trial timing, scoring thresholds, confound controls, and comparator assays are documented together with the primary endpoint.

4.4 Current directions

Quarterly editorial review of emerging Visual X Maze methodology. Q2 2026

Methods

Endpoint standardization

Define correct choices, latency, exclusions, and engagement flags before comparing cohorts.

Emerging

Automated scoring

Camera and event-log workflows can reduce observer burden and improve consistency when zone definitions and event thresholds are validated.

Methods

Comparator batteries

Visual X Maze should link to adjacent maze, motor, or motivation assays when interpretation depends on controls.

Emerging

Integrated method reporting

Apparatus dimensions, protocol fit, tracking compatibility, and endpoint definitions should be reported together so results are easier to reproduce.

§ 5

References

10 selected methods and validation references for Visual X Maze.

  1. Dudchenko PA. An overview of the tasks used to test working memory in rodents. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2004;28(7):699-709. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.09.002
  2. Shoji H, et al. Comprehensive behavioral test battery for mice. Curr Protoc Mouse Biol. 2012;2:153-187. Find source
  3. Vorhees CV, Williams MT. Assessing spatial learning and memory in rodents. ILAR J. 2014;55(2):310-332. Find source
  4. Lalonde R. The neurobiological basis of spontaneous alternation. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002;26(1):91-104. doi:10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00041-0
  5. Walf AA, Frye CA. The use of the elevated plus maze as an assay of anxiety-related behavior in rodents. Nat Protoc. 2007;2(2):322-328. doi:10.1038/nprot.2007.44
  6. Pellow S, Chopin P, File SE, Briley M. Validation of open:closed arm entries in an elevated plus-maze as a measure of anxiety in the rat. J Neurosci Methods. 1985;14(3):149-167. doi:10.1016/0165-0270(85)90031-7
  7. Crawley JN, Goodwin FK. Preliminary report of a simple animal behavior model for the anxiolytic effects of benzodiazepines. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1980;13(2):167-170. doi:10.1016/0091-3057(80)90067-2
  8. File SE, Wardill AG. Validity of head-dipping as a measure of exploration in a modified hole-board. Psychopharmacologia. 1975;44(1):53-59. Find source
  9. Walsh RN, Cummins RA. The Open-Field Test: a critical review. Psychol Bull. 1976;83(3):482-504. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.83.3.482
  10. Brown RE, Corey SC, Moore AK. Differences in measures of exploration and fear in MHC-congenic C57BL/6J and B6-H-2K mice. Behav Genet. 1999;29(4):263-271. Find source
Visual X Maze (ViS4M)
Visual X Maze (ViS4M)
$4,990.00
Added to quoteView Quote