Literature DB >> 18210991

Ultrasonic sound as an indicator of acute pain in laboratory mice.

Wendy O Williams1, Daniel K Riskin, And Kathleen M Mott.   

Abstract

In response to pain, mice may vocalize at frequencies above the range of human hearing (greater than 20 kHz). To determine whether an ultrasonic recording system is a reliable tool for assessing acute pain, we measured audible and ultrasonic vocalization in mice subjected to either nonpainful or potentially painful procedures performed routinely in animal facilities. Data were collected from 109 weanling mice (Mus musculus; B6, 129S6-Stab 5b) scheduled for 2 potentially painful procedures: DNA testing by tail snip and identification by ear notching. The mice each were assigned randomly to 1 of 4 groups: 1) actual tail snip, 2) sham tail snip, 3) actual ear notch, or 4) sham ear notch. Vocalizations during the treatments were recorded with an ultrasonic recorder. Most mice (65%; n = 55) demonstrated no vocal response to the potentially painful procedures. More mice that received actual tail snips produced audible sounds (11 of 29 mice) than did those that underwent sham tail snips (0 of 30 mice). In addition, audible vocalizations occurred more frequently during ear notch procedures (8 of 26 mice) than during sham ear-notch manipulations (2 of 24 mice). For all 20 of the mice that produced ultrasonic vocalizations, these calls were accompanied by simultaneous audible components. We conclude that ultrasonic vocalizations do not provide any more information than do audible vocalizations for assessing responses to potentially painful procedures. In addition, because many mice made no sound at all after a potentially painful stimulus, vocalizations generally are not good metrics of acute pain in laboratory mice. Alternatively, the lack of vocalizations in many of the mice may suggest that tail snipping and ear notching are not particularly painful procedures for most of these mice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18210991      PMCID: PMC2652617     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci        ISSN: 1559-6109            Impact factor:   1.232


  13 in total

Review 1.  Recognizing pain and distress in laboratory animals.

Authors:  E Carstens; G P Moberg
Journal:  ILAR J       Date:  2000

2.  Vocal responses of piglets to castration: identifying procedural sources of pain.

Authors: 
Journal:  Appl Anim Behav Sci       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 2.448

3.  Ultrasonic vocalizations as indices of affective states in rats.

Authors:  Brian Knutson; Jeffrey Burgdorf; Jaak Panksepp
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Recognizing and assessing pain, suffering and distress in laboratory animals: a survey of current practice in the UK with recommendations.

Authors:  Penny Hawkins
Journal:  Lab Anim       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.471

Review 5.  The genetic mediation of individual differences in sensitivity to pain and its inhibition.

Authors:  J S Mogil
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1999-07-06       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Audible and ultrasonic vocalization elicited by single electrical nociceptive stimuli to the tail in the rat.

Authors:  D Jourdan; D Ardid; E Chapuy; A Eschalier; D Le Bars
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 6.961

7.  Computerized analysis of audible and ultrasonic vocalizations of rats as a standardized measure of pain-related behavior.

Authors:  Jeong S Han; Gary C Bird; Weidong Li; Justina Jones; Volker Neugebauer
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 2.390

8.  Analysis of ultrasonic vocalisation does not allow chronic pain to be evaluated in rats.

Authors:  Didier Jourdan; D Ardid; A Eschalier
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 6.961

9.  Spectrographic analysis of the ultrasonic vocalisations of adult male and female BALB/c mice.

Authors:  Benjamin E F Gourbal; Mathieu Barthelemy; Gilles Petit; Claude Gabrion
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2004-07-06

10.  Ultrasonic songs of male mice.

Authors:  Timothy E Holy; Zhongsheng Guo
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2005-11-01       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  39 in total

Review 1.  Behavioral assessments of the aversive quality of pain in animals.

Authors:  Xu-Jie Zhang; Tian-Wei Zhang; San-Jue Hu; Hui Xu
Journal:  Neurosci Bull       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 5.203

2.  Effects of early atipamezole reversal of medetomidine-ketamine anesthesia in mice.

Authors:  Naomi J Baker; John C Schofield; Mark D Caswell; Alexander D McLellan
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Coding the meaning of sounds: contextual modulation of auditory responses in the basolateral amygdala.

Authors:  Jasmine M S Grimsley; Emily G Hazlett; Jeffrey J Wenstrup
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  An improved behavioural assay demonstrates that ultrasound vocalizations constitute a reliable indicator of chronic cancer pain and neuropathic pain.

Authors:  Martina Kurejova; Ulrike Nattenmüller; Ullrich Hildebrandt; Deepitha Selvaraj; Sebastian Stösser; Rohini Kuner
Journal:  Mol Pain       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 3.395

5.  Is Optogenetic Activation of Vglut1-Positive Aβ Low-Threshold Mechanoreceptors Sufficient to Induce Tactile Allodynia in Mice after Nerve Injury?

Authors:  Alexander Chamessian; Megumi Matsuda; Michael Young; Michelle Wang; Zhi-Jun Zhang; Di Liu; Brielle Tobin; Zhen-Zhong Xu; Thomas Van de Ven; Ru-Rong Ji
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Developmental and behavioral effects of toe clipping on neonatal and preweanling mice with and without vapocoolant anesthesia.

Authors:  Lee-Ronn Paluch; Christine C Lieggi; Magali Dumont; Sebastien Monette; Elyn R Riedel; Neil S Lipman
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.232

7.  High channel count microphone array accurately and precisely localizes ultrasonic signals from freely-moving mice.

Authors:  Megan R Warren; Daniel T Sangiamo; Joshua P Neunuebel
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 2.390

8.  Comparing Phlebotomy by Tail Tip Amputation, Facial Vein Puncture, and Tail Vein Incision in C57BL/6 Mice by Using Physiologic and Behavioral Metrics of Pain and Distress.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Moore; Thomas A Cleland; Wendy O Williams; Christine M Peterson; Bhupinder Singh; Teresa L Southard; Bret Pasch; Rachael N Labitt; Erin K Daugherity
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 1.232

9.  Female- and Intruder-induced Ultrasonic Vocalizations in C57BL/6J Mice as Proxy Indicators for Animal Wellbeing.

Authors:  Brian J Smith; Kate E P Bruner; Lon V Kendall
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2019-10-02       Impact factor: 0.982

Review 10.  Review of Intraperitoneal Injection of Sodium Pentobarbital as a Method of Euthanasia in Laboratory Rodents.

Authors:  Colin A Laferriere; Daniel Sj Pang
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 1.232

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.