Literature DB >> 21722654

Pharmacological reversal of cognitive bias in the chick anxiety-depression model.

Kristen A Hymel1, Kenneth J Sufka.   

Abstract

Cognitive bias presents in clinical populations where anxious individuals adopt a more pessimistic interpretation of ambiguous aversive stimuli and depressed individuals adopt both a more pessimistic interpretation of ambiguous aversive stimuli and a less optimistic interpretation of ambiguous appetitive stimuli. These biases have been reversed by anxiolytics and antidepressants. In the current study, chicks exposed to an isolation stressor of 5-min to induce an anxiety-like state or 60-min to induce a depressive-like state were tested in a straight alley maze to a series of morphed ambiguous appetitive (chick silhouette) to aversive (owl silhouette) cues. Chicks in the depression-like state displayed more pessimistic-like and less optimistic-like approach behavior to ambiguous aversive and appetitive cues, respectively. Both forms of cognitive bias were reversed by 15.0 mg/kg imipramine. Chicks in anxiety-like state displayed more pessimistic-like approach behavior under the ambiguous aversive stimulus cues. However, 0.10 mg/kg clonidine produced modest sedation and thus, was ineffective at reversing this bias. The observation that cognitive biases of more pessimism and less optimism can be reversed in the depression-like phase by imipramine adds to the validity of the chick anxiety-depression model as a neuropsychiatric simulation. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'Anxiety and Depression'.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21722654     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2011.06.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropharmacology        ISSN: 0028-3908            Impact factor:   5.250


  12 in total

Review 1.  Use of cognitive bias as a welfare tool in poultry.

Authors:  Ľubor Košťál; Zuzana Skalná; Katarína Pichová
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Application of Cognitive Bias Testing in Neuropsychiatric Disorders: A Mini-Review Based on Animal Studies.

Authors:  Yu-Han Zhang; Ning Wang; Xiao-Xiao Lin; Jin-Yan Wang; Fei Luo
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 3.617

3.  A Screen-Peck Task for Investigating Cognitive Bias in Laying Hens.

Authors:  Amanda Deakin; William J Browne; James J L Hodge; Elizabeth S Paul; Michael Mendl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The effects of juvenile stress on anxiety, cognitive bias and decision making in adulthood: a rat model.

Authors:  Nichola M Brydges; Lynsey Hall; Rachael Nicolson; Megan C Holmes; Jeremy Hall
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Non-mammalian models in behavioral neuroscience: consequences for biological psychiatry.

Authors:  Caio Maximino; Rhayra Xavier do Carmo Silva; Suéllen de Nazaré Santos da Silva; Laís do Socorro Dos Santos Rodrigues; Hellen Barbosa; Tayana Silva de Carvalho; Luana Ketlen Dos Reis Leão; Monica Gomes Lima; Karen Renata Matos Oliveira; Anderson Manoel Herculano
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 3.558

Review 6.  Modelling cognitive affective biases in major depressive disorder using rodents.

Authors:  Claire A Hales; Sarah A Stuart; Michael H Anderson; Emma S J Robinson
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 8.739

Review 7.  Making Decisions under Ambiguity: Judgment Bias Tasks for Assessing Emotional State in Animals.

Authors:  Sanne Roelofs; Hetty Boleij; Rebecca E Nordquist; Franz Josef van der Staay
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 3.558

8.  Happy hamsters? Enrichment induces positive judgement bias for mildly (but not truly) ambiguous cues to reward and punishment in Mesocricetus auratus.

Authors:  Emily J Bethell; Nicola F Koyama
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 2.963

9.  Spectral entropy of early-life distress calls as an iceberg indicator of chicken welfare.

Authors:  Katherine A Herborn; Alan G McElligott; Malcolm A Mitchell; Victoria Sandilands; Brett Bradshaw; Lucy Asher
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 10.  Affect-Driven Attention Biases as Animal Welfare Indicators: Review and Methods.

Authors:  Andrew Crump; Gareth Arnott; Emily J Bethell
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 2.752

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.