(A) Schematic of the fear conditioning paradigm. (B–D) Comparisons of context-specific freezing behavior among WT, Ube3a⁺², and Ube3a⁺⁴ mice. (B) Graph of baseline freezing expressed as percentage of total time. (C and D) Mean ± SEM freezing time 24 hours (C) and 28 days (D) after conditioning to ascertain short- and long-term fear-memory, respectively. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test. (E–G) Spatial memory acquisition as determined from the Morris water maze paradigm. Heatmap visualization and mean ± SEM graphing of average time spent by WT (E), Ube3a⁺² (F), and Ube3a⁺⁴ (G) mice in maze quadrants Q1, Q2, and Q3 and the platform containing the target quadrant (TQ). Repeated-measures 1-way ANOVA, with Dunnett’s post hoc test. (H) Schematic of the experimental timeline for the magazine training (MAG), acquisition (ACQ), and extinction (EXT) tests (top) and of the operant conditioning chambers (bottom). Behavioral chambers contained a food magazine and 2 nose-poke apertures. Gray indicates the presence of food reward (MAG, ACQ); white indicates the absence of reward (EXT). Yellow indicates the presence of the light cue; black, its absence. (I) Left to right: Graphs of mean ± SEM rewarded nose pokes during MAG training, days to reach operant acquisition criteria, and raw correct and incorrect responses at ACQ criteria with computed response accuracy (proportion of correct responses to the cued aperture). Unpaired 2-tailed t test. (J and K) Graphs of mean ± SEM cued (J) and non-cued (K) responses over the last 5 days of ACQ and during each day of EXT. Left: Raw responses. Right: Normalized responses (to the group means of cued responses during the last 5 days of ACQ). Two-way ANOVA, Bonferroni’s post hoc. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.