STUDY OBJECTIVES: (a) Develop a new statistical approach to describe the microarchitecture of wakefulness and sleep in mice; (b) evaluate differences among inbred strains in this microarchitecture; (c) compare results when data are scored in 4-s versus 10-s epochs. DESIGN: Studies in male mice of four inbred strains: AJ, C57BL/6, DBA and PWD. EEG/EMG were recorded for 24h and scored independently in 4-s and 10-s epochs. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Distribution of bout durations of wakefulness, NREM and REM sleep in mice has two distinct components, i.e., short and longer bouts. This is described as a spike (short bouts) and slab (longer bouts) distribution, a particular type of mixture model. The distribution in any state depends on the state the mouse is transitioning from and can be characterized by three parameters: the number of such bouts conditional on the previous state, the size of the spike, and the average length of the slab. While conventional statistics such as time spent in state, average bout duration, and number of bouts show some differences between inbred strains, this new statistical approach reveals more major differences. The major difference between strains is their ability to sustain long bouts of NREM sleep or wakefulness. Scoring mouse sleep/wake in 4-s epochs offered little new information when using conventional metrics but did when evaluating the microarchitecture based on this new approach. CONCLUSIONS: Standard statistical approaches do not adequately characterize the microarchitecture of mouse behavioral state. Approaches based on a spike-and-slab provide a quantitative description.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: (a) Develop a new statistical approach to describe the microarchitecture of wakefulness and sleep in mice; (b) evaluate differences among inbred strains in this microarchitecture; (c) compare results when data are scored in 4-s versus 10-s epochs. DESIGN: Studies in male mice of four inbred strains: AJ, C57BL/6, DBA and PWD. EEG/EMG were recorded for 24h and scored independently in 4-s and 10-s epochs. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Distribution of bout durations of wakefulness, NREM and REM sleep in mice has two distinct components, i.e., short and longer bouts. This is described as a spike (short bouts) and slab (longer bouts) distribution, a particular type of mixture model. The distribution in any state depends on the state the mouse is transitioning from and can be characterized by three parameters: the number of such bouts conditional on the previous state, the size of the spike, and the average length of the slab. While conventional statistics such as time spent in state, average bout duration, and number of bouts show some differences between inbred strains, this new statistical approach reveals more major differences. The major difference between strains is their ability to sustain long bouts of NREM sleep or wakefulness. Scoring mouse sleep/wake in 4-s epochs offered little new information when using conventional metrics but did when evaluating the microarchitecture based on this new approach. CONCLUSIONS: Standard statistical approaches do not adequately characterize the microarchitecture of mouse behavioral state. Approaches based on a spike-and-slab provide a quantitative description.
Authors: Paul Franken; Carol A Dudley; Sandi Jo Estill; Monique Barakat; Ryan Thomason; Bruce F O'Hara; Steven L McKnight Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-04-24 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Allan I Pack; Raymond J Galante; Greg Maislin; Jacqueline Cater; Dimitris Metaxas; Shan Lu; Lin Zhang; Randy Von Smith; Timothy Kay; Jie Lian; Karen Svenson; Luanne L Peters Journal: Physiol Genomics Date: 2006-09-19 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Chung-Chuan Lo; Thomas Chou; Thomas Penzel; Thomas E Scammell; Robert E Strecker; H Eugene Stanley; Plamen Ch Ivanov Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-12-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: R M Chemelli; J T Willie; C M Sinton; J K Elmquist; T Scammell; C Lee; J A Richardson; S C Williams; Y Xiong; Y Kisanuki; T E Fitch; M Nakazato; R E Hammer; C B Saper; M Yanagisawa Journal: Cell Date: 1999-08-20 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Elizabeth B Klerman; Wei Wang; Jeanne F Duffy; Derk-Jan Dijk; Charles A Czeisler; Richard E Kronauer Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2012-06-23 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Rachel K Rowe; Jordan L Harrison; Helena W Morrison; Vignesh Subbian; Sean M Murphy; Jonathan Lifshitz Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Martha S Windrem; Mikhail Osipovitch; Zhengshan Liu; Janna Bates; Devin Chandler-Militello; Lisa Zou; Jared Munir; Steven Schanz; Katherine McCoy; Robert H Miller; Su Wang; Maiken Nedergaard; Robert L Findling; Paul J Tesar; Steven A Goldman Journal: Cell Stem Cell Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 24.633
Authors: Christopher C Angelakos; Adam J Watson; W Timothy O'Brien; Kyle S Krainock; Thomas Nickl-Jockschat; Ted Abel Journal: Autism Res Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 5.216
Authors: Blakeley B McShane; Raymond J Galante; Michael Biber; Shane T Jensen; Abraham J Wyner; Allan I Pack Journal: Sleep Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Jordan L Harrison; Rachel K Rowe; Timothy W Ellis; Nicole S Yee; Bruce F O'Hara; P David Adelson; Jonathan Lifshitz Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2015-01-10 Impact factor: 7.217