Neuroscience & Surgery

Zebrafish 5 Choice

$5,990.00

Automated 5-choice serial reaction time task apparatus for zebrafish behavioral testing, featuring curved maze design with colored cue lights and integrated pellet dispensing system.

Key Specifications
Length
36cm
number_of_apertures
5
aperture_cue_light_colors
white, red, green, blue
fiber_optic_cables
5 waterproof cables
pellet_dispenser_rotation
360°
food_delivery_distance_from_gate
21cm
SKU:ME-4871
Need Help? Visit our Support CenterKnowledge base, order lookup, and ticket support
Scientist guidance
Louise Corscadden, PhD, Neuroscience

Louise Corscadden, PhD

Neuroscience · ConductScience

Ask Louise about Zebrafish 5 Choice fit, setup, configuration, or quote prep.

Upgrade Options

Configuration considerations

Common Zebrafish 5-Choice 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

Zebrafish 5-Choice

Aquatic choice chamber with five response zones or stimulus ports

attention, visual discrimination, response selection, and aquatic decision-making workflows.

Quote

Request Quote
BuyableScaled option

Zebrafish 5-Choice 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

Zebrafish 5-Choice 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

Configure tracking ->

§ 1

Introduction

The Zebrafish 5-Choice is a species-specific behavioral assay built around attention, visual discrimination, response selection, and aquatic decision-making workflows. Interpretable data depend on matching the apparatus geometry, subject species, trial structure, and scoring rules to the behavioral construct under study. 1

Aquatic five-choice protocols depend on stable geometry, consistent trial timing, and pre-defined scoring rules. Without those controls, correct responses 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 Zebrafish 5-Choice results alongside the product specifications. 1

§ 2

Methods

2.1 Procedure

Aquatic five-choice with standardized setup, trial timing, and endpoint extraction.

Pre-test setup

  1. 1.Define constructPre-register whether the study uses Zebrafish 5-Choice for species-specific behavioral behavior, screening, cohort comparison, or apparatus validation.
  2. 2.Calibrate apparatusVerify aquatic choice chamber with five response zones or stimulus ports, visibility, lighting, surface condition, cue placement, and camera field of view before animals enter the room.
  3. 3.Set scoring rulesDefine correct responses, omissions, exclusions, latency cutoffs, and event thresholds before acquisition starts.
  4. 4.Control carryoverUse consistent cleaning, handling, acclimation, and inter-trial timing so odor, stress, and fatigue do not become hidden treatment variables.

Trial sequence

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

Critical methodological constraints

  • Water quality. Document water quality because it can shift correct responses independent of the intended construct.
  • Stimulus salience. Keep stimulus salience stable across cohorts and sessions.
  • Tank lighting. Audit tank lighting before interpreting group differences.
  • Training history. Report training history when it changes engagement, exploration, or measurable trial completion.
  • Group versus individual testing. Flag group versus individual testing during QA because it often explains apparent assay failure.2

2.2 Measurement & Analysis

Core Zebrafish 5-Choice endpoints for behavioral interpretation and apparatus quality control.

Correct responses

Attention and discrimination

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

Response latency

Latency and initiation

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

Zone sequence

Spatial or zone strategy

Zone 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.

Stimulus failures

Quality-control flag

Stimulus failures 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 responses ratio (analysis)

A compact percentage summary for Zebrafish 5-Choice output.

Inline calculator

Type the values your tracker recorded.

Full calculator with 95% CI ->
Correct responses ratio

70.0%

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

§ 3

Results

Aggregate publication data, sample apparatus output, and recent findings from the live PubMed feed.

3.1 Publication trends

PubMed volume and co-occurring behavioral methods for Zebrafish 5-Choice studies.

Figure 1 · EPM publications by year (PubMed)

The paradigm has been dominant for 40 years and is still growing.

Live · Weekly

2000201020202025 YTD: 42 papers

Total in PubMed since 1985: 1,092+ papers. Updated 2026-05-12.

Figure 2 · Methods co-occurring with EPM (last 12 months)

Other paradigms most often run alongside EPM in the same paper.

Live

3.2 Sample apparatus output

Representative Zebrafish 5-Choice output for methods review and endpoint interpretation.

Table 1 · Per-animal EPM scoring output

Download sample CSV →
AnimalGroupCorrect responsesResponse latencyZone sequenceSummary
ZF5-001Control441.8 sleft-center73.3%
ZF5-002Control412.1 sright-center68.3%
ZF5-003Impaired274.4 srandom45.0%
ZF5-004Impaired254.9 somissions41.7%

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

3.3 Recent methods context

  • May 2026Source note

    Zebrafish 5-Choice methods refresh: endpoint definitions, QA flags, and comparator assays

    ConductScience methods note prepared for citation review.

    The first citation-cron pass should replace this editorial seed with current Zebrafish 5-Choice methods papers filtered for apparatus, protocol, and endpoint relevance.

View all 1092matching papers on PubMed ->

§ 4

Discussion

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

4.1 Common confounds

Variables that shift Zebrafish 5-Choice results independent of anxiety state.

Water quality

Water quality can change apparent Zebrafish 5-Choice performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Stimulus salience

Stimulus salience can change apparent Zebrafish 5-Choice performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Tank lighting

Tank lighting can change apparent Zebrafish 5-Choice performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Training history

Training history can change apparent Zebrafish 5-Choice performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

Group versus individual testing

Group versus individual testing can change apparent Zebrafish 5-Choice performance without reflecting the intended behavioral construct. Control it in setup and report it in methods.

4.2 Construct validity caveats

Zebrafish 5-Choice 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 Zebrafish 5-Choice?

Choose Zebrafish 5-Choice when the research question matches attention, visual discrimination, response selection, and aquatic decision-making workflows. and the lab can control water quality, stimulus salience, 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 Zebrafish 5-Choice methodology. Q2 2026

Methods

Endpoint standardization

Define correct responses, 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

Zebrafish 5-Choice 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 Zebrafish 5-Choice.

  1. Stewart AM, et al. The light/dark preference test in zebrafish. Nat Protoc. 2011;6(11):1780-1787. Find source
  2. Kalueff AV, et al. Towards a comprehensive catalog of zebrafish behavior. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14(7):476-488. Find source
  3. Levin ED, Cerutti DT. Behavioral neuroscience of zebrafish. Methods Cell Biol. 2009;91:293-310. Find source
  4. Maximino C, et al. Measuring anxiety in zebrafish: a critical review. Behav Brain Res. 2010;214(2):157-171. Find source
  5. Egan RJ, et al. Understanding behavioral and physiological phenotypes of stress and anxiety in zebrafish. Behav Brain Res. 2009;205(1):38-44. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.06.022
  6. Cachat J, et al. Measuring behavioral and endocrine responses to novelty stress in adult zebrafish. Nat Protoc. 2010;5(11):1786-1799. Find source
  7. Cachat J, et al. Three-dimensional neurophenotyping of adult zebrafish behavior. PLoS One. 2011;6(3):e17597. Find source
  8. Blank M, Guerim LD, Cordeiro RF, Vianna MR. A one-trial inhibitory avoidance task to zebrafish: rapid acquisition of an NMDA-dependent long-term memory. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2009;92(4):529-534. Find source
  9. Sison M, Gerlai R. Associative learning in zebrafish (Danio rerio) in the plus maze. Behav Brain Res. 2010;207(1):99-104. Find source
  10. Parker MO, Brock AJ, Walton RT, Brennan CH. The role of zebrafish (Danio rerio) in dissecting the genetics and neural circuits of executive function. Front Neural Circuits. 2013;7:63. Find source
Zebrafish 5 Choice
Zebrafish 5 Choice
$5,990.00
Added to quoteView Quote