Literature DB >> 17823243

Genetic background differences and nonassociative effects in mouse trace fear conditioning.

Dani R Smith1, Michela Gallagher, Mark E Stanton.   

Abstract

Fear conditioning, including variants such as delay and trace conditioning that depend on different neural systems, is widely used to behaviorally characterize genetically altered mice. We present data from three strains of mice, C57/BL6 (C57), 129/SvlmJ (129), and a hybrid strain of the two (F(1) hybrids), trained on various versions of a trace fear-conditioning protocol. The initial version was taken from the literature but included unpaired control groups to assess nonassociative effects on test performance. We observed high levels of nonassociative freezing in both contextual and cued test conditions. In particular, nonassociative freezing in unpaired control groups was equivalent to freezing shown by paired groups in the tests for trace conditioning. A number of pilot studies resulted in a new protocol that yielded strong context conditioning and low levels of nonassociative freezing in all mouse strains. During the trace-CS test in this protocol, freezing in unpaired controls remained low in all strains, and both the C57s and F(1) hybrids showed reliable associative trace fear conditioning. Trace conditioning, however, was not obtained in the 129 mice. Our findings indicate that caution is warranted in interpreting mouse fear-conditioning studies that lack control conditions to address nonassociative effects. They also reveal a final set of parameters that are important for minimizing such nonassociative effects and demonstrate strain differences across performance in mouse contextual and trace fear conditioning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17823243      PMCID: PMC1994077          DOI: 10.1101/lm.614807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Mem        ISSN: 1072-0502            Impact factor:   2.460


  67 in total

1.  Subcortical correlates of differential classical conditioning of aversive emotional reactions in social phobia.

Authors:  F Schneider; U Weiss; C Kessler; H W Müller-Gärtner; S Posse; J B Salloum; W Grodd; F Himmelmann; W Gaebel; N Birbaumer
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  1999-04-01       Impact factor: 13.382

2.  Behavioral differences among fourteen inbred mouse strains commonly used as disease models.

Authors:  Gerald W M Bothe; Valerie J Bolivar; Michelle J Vedder; James G Geistfeld
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 0.982

3.  Dorsal hippocampus involvement in trace fear conditioning with long, but not short, trace intervals in mice.

Authors:  Najwa Chowdhury; Jennifer J Quinn; Michael S Fanselow
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.912

4.  Inbred mouse strains differ in the regulation of startle and prepulse inhibition of the startle response.

Authors:  A E Bullock; B S Slobe; V Vázquez; A C Collins
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 1.912

5.  Entorhinal cortex lesions disrupt fear conditioning to background context but spare fear conditioning to a tone in the rat.

Authors:  M Majchrzak; B Ferry; A R Marchand; K Herbeaux; A Seillier; A Barbelivien
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.899

6.  Assessment of hearing in 80 inbred strains of mice by ABR threshold analyses.

Authors:  Q Y Zheng; K R Johnson; L C Erway
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Assessment of locomotor activity, acoustic and tactile startle, and prepulse inhibition of startle in inbred mouse strains and F1 hybrids: implications of genetic background for single gene and quantitative trait loci analyses.

Authors:  S F Logue; E H Owen; D L Rasmussen; J M Wehner
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.590

8.  Assessment of learning by the Morris water task and fear conditioning in inbred mouse strains and F1 hybrids: implications of genetic background for single gene mutations and quantitative trait loci analyses.

Authors:  E H Owen; S F Logue; D L Rasmussen; J M Wehner
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.590

Review 9.  Behavioral phenotypes of inbred mouse strains: implications and recommendations for molecular studies.

Authors:  J N Crawley; J K Belknap; A Collins; J C Crabbe; W Frankel; N Henderson; R J Hitzemann; S C Maxson; L L Miner; A J Silva; J M Wehner; A Wynshaw-Boris; R Paylor
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.530

10.  Hippocampectomy disrupts auditory trace fear conditioning and contextual fear conditioning in the rat.

Authors:  M D McEchron; H Bouwmeester; W Tseng; C Weiss; J F Disterhoft
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.899

View more
  30 in total

1.  Differences in hippocampal CREB phosphorylation in trace fear conditioning of two inbred mouse strains.

Authors:  Yoo Kyeong Hwang; Jae-Chun Song; Seol-Heui Han; Jeiwon Cho; Dani R Smith; Michela Gallagher; Jung-Soo Han
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 3.252

2.  Cerebellar and extracerebellar involvement in mouse eyeblink conditioning: the ACDC model.

Authors:  Henk-Jan Boele; Sebastiaan K E Koekkoek; Chris I De Zeeuw
Journal:  Front Cell Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 5.505

3.  Similarities and differences in spatial learning and object recognition between young male C57Bl/6J mice and Sprague-Dawley rats.

Authors:  Alexis M Stranahan
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.912

4.  Trace fear conditioning in mice.

Authors:  Joaquin N Lugo; Gregory D Smith; Andrew J Holley
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 1.355

5.  Sex differences in interval timing and attention to time in C57Bl/6J mice.

Authors:  Mona Buhusi; Mitchell J Bartlett; Catalin V Buhusi
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Anterior Cingulate Cortex and Ventral Hippocampal Inputs to the Basolateral Amygdala Selectively Control Generalized Fear.

Authors:  Samantha Ortiz; Maeson S Latsko; Julia L Fouty; Sohini Dutta; Jordan M Adkins; Aaron M Jasnow
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Postweaning, forebrain-specific perturbation of the oxytocin system impairs fear conditioning.

Authors:  J H Pagani; H-J Lee; W S Young
Journal:  Genes Brain Behav       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 3.449

8.  Modulation of behavioral networks by selective interneuronal inactivation.

Authors:  M J Schmidt; S Horvath; P Ebert; J L Norris; E H Seeley; J Brown; L Gellert; M Everheart; K A Garbett; T W Grice; R M Caprioli; K Mirnics
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 15.992

9.  The role of cannabinoid 1 receptor expressing interneurons in behavior.

Authors:  Jacquelyn A Brown; Szatmár Horváth; Krassimira A Garbett; Martin J Schmidt; Monika Everheart; Levente Gellért; Philip Ebert; Károly Mirnics
Journal:  Neurobiol Dis       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.996

10.  Disruption of shmt1 impairs hippocampal neurogenesis and mnemonic function in mice.

Authors:  Elena V Abarinov; Anna E Beaudin; Martha S Field; Cheryll A Perry; Robert H Allen; Sally P Stabler; Patrick J Stover
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 4.798

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.