Nature and nurture: Comparing mouse behavior in classic versus revised anxiety-like and social behavioral assays in genetically or environmentally defined groups
Janet Ronquillo, Michael T. Nguyen, Linnea Y. Rothi, Trung-Dan Bui-Tu, Jocelyn Yang, Lindsay R. Halladay
{"title":"Nature and nurture: Comparing mouse behavior in classic versus revised anxiety-like and social behavioral assays in genetically or environmentally defined groups","authors":"Janet Ronquillo, Michael T. Nguyen, Linnea Y. Rothi, Trung-Dan Bui-Tu, Jocelyn Yang, Lindsay R. Halladay","doi":"10.1111/gbb.12869","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Widely used rodent anxiety assays like the elevated plus maze (EPM) and the open field test (OFT) are conflated with rodents' natural preference for dark over light environments or protected over open spaces. The EPM and OFT have been used for decades but are often criticized by behavioral scientists. Years ago, two revised anxiety assays were designed to improve upon the “classic” tests by excluding the possibility to avoid or escape aversion. The 3-D radial arm maze (3DR) and the 3-D open field test (3Doft) utilize continual motivational conflict to better model anxiety; each consist of an open space connected to ambiguous paths toward uncertain escape. Despite their utility, the revised assays have not caught on. This could be because no study yet has directly compared classic and revised assays in the same animals. To remedy this, we contrasted behavior from a battery of assays (EPM, OFT, 3DR, 3Doft and a sociability test) in mice defined genetically by isogenic strain, or environmentally by postnatal experience. One major motivation for this work is to inform future studies by offering a transparent look at individual outcomes on these assays, as there is no one-size-fits-all test to assess rodent anxiety-like behavior. Findings suggest that classic assays may sufficiently characterize differences across genetically defined groups, but the revised 3DR may be advantageous for investigating more nuanced behavioral differences such as those stemming from environmental factors. Finally, exposure to multiple assays significantly affected sociability, highlighting concerns for designing and interpreting batteries of rodent behavioral tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":50426,"journal":{"name":"Genes Brain and Behavior","volume":"22 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gbb.12869","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genes Brain and Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gbb.12869","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Widely used rodent anxiety assays like the elevated plus maze (EPM) and the open field test (OFT) are conflated with rodents' natural preference for dark over light environments or protected over open spaces. The EPM and OFT have been used for decades but are often criticized by behavioral scientists. Years ago, two revised anxiety assays were designed to improve upon the “classic” tests by excluding the possibility to avoid or escape aversion. The 3-D radial arm maze (3DR) and the 3-D open field test (3Doft) utilize continual motivational conflict to better model anxiety; each consist of an open space connected to ambiguous paths toward uncertain escape. Despite their utility, the revised assays have not caught on. This could be because no study yet has directly compared classic and revised assays in the same animals. To remedy this, we contrasted behavior from a battery of assays (EPM, OFT, 3DR, 3Doft and a sociability test) in mice defined genetically by isogenic strain, or environmentally by postnatal experience. One major motivation for this work is to inform future studies by offering a transparent look at individual outcomes on these assays, as there is no one-size-fits-all test to assess rodent anxiety-like behavior. Findings suggest that classic assays may sufficiently characterize differences across genetically defined groups, but the revised 3DR may be advantageous for investigating more nuanced behavioral differences such as those stemming from environmental factors. Finally, exposure to multiple assays significantly affected sociability, highlighting concerns for designing and interpreting batteries of rodent behavioral tests.
期刊介绍:
Genes, Brain and Behavior was launched in 2002 with the aim of publishing top quality research in behavioral and neural genetics in their broadest sense. The emphasis is on the analysis of the behavioral and neural phenotypes under consideration, the unifying theme being the genetic approach as a tool to increase our understanding of these phenotypes.
Genes Brain and Behavior is pleased to offer the following features:
8 issues per year
online submissions with first editorial decisions within 3-4 weeks and fast publication at Wiley-Blackwells
High visibility through its coverage by PubMed/Medline, Current Contents and other major abstracting and indexing services
Inclusion in the Wiley-Blackwell consortial license, extending readership to thousands of international libraries and institutions
A large and varied editorial board comprising of international specialists.