Jesse Brodkin1, Dana Frank2, Ryan Grippo3, Michal Hausfater3, Maria Gulinello4, Nils Achterholt5, Christian Gutzen6. 1. Behavioral Instruments, 5 Jill Court Unit 1, Hillsborough, NJ 08844, United States. Electronic address: Brodkin@behavioralinstruments.com. 2. Behavioral Instruments, 5 Jill Court Unit 1, Hillsborough, NJ 08844, United States. 3. Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, United States. 4. Behavioral Core Facility, Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University, Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neuroscience, Rose F. Kennedy Center, RM 925, 1410 Pelham Pkwy S., Bronx, NY 10461, United States. 5. BIOBSERVE GmbH, Siegburger Str. 35, 53757 St. Augustin, Germany. 6. BIOBSERVE GmbH, Siegburger Str. 35, 53757 St. Augustin, Germany. Electronic address: christian.gutzen@biobserve.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioral assessment of mutant mouse models and novel candidate drugs is a slow and labor intensive process. This limitation produces a significant impediment to CNS drug discovery. NEW METHOD: By combining video and vibration analysis we created an automated system that provides the most detailed description of mouse behavior available. Our system (The Behavioral Spectrometer) allowed for the rapid assessment of behavioral abnormalities in the BTBR model of Autism, the restraint model of stress and the irritant model of inflammatory pain. RESULTS: We found that each model produced a unique alteration of the spectrum of behavior emitted by the mice. BTBR mice engaged in more grooming and less rearing behaviors. Prior restraint stress produced dramatic increases in grooming activity at the expense of locomotor behavior. Pain produced profound decreases in emitted behavior that were reversible with analgesic treatment. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): We evaluated our system through a direct comparison on the same subjects with the current "gold standard" of human observation of video recordings. Using the same mice evaluated over the same range of behaviors, the Behavioral Spectrometer produced a quantitative categorization of behavior that was highly correlated with the scores produced by trained human observers (r=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that this new system is a highly valid and sensitive method to characterize behavioral effects in mice. As a fully automated and easily scalable instrument the Behavioral Spectrometer represents a high-throughput behavioral tool that reduces the time and labor involved in behavioral research.
BACKGROUND: Behavioral assessment of mutant mouse models and novel candidate drugs is a slow and labor intensive process. This limitation produces a significant impediment to CNS drug discovery. NEW METHOD: By combining video and vibration analysis we created an automated system that provides the most detailed description of mouse behavior available. Our system (The Behavioral Spectrometer) allowed for the rapid assessment of behavioral abnormalities in the BTBR model of Autism, the restraint model of stress and the irritant model of inflammatory pain. RESULTS: We found that each model produced a unique alteration of the spectrum of behavior emitted by the mice. BTBRmice engaged in more grooming and less rearing behaviors. Prior restraint stress produced dramatic increases in grooming activity at the expense of locomotor behavior. Pain produced profound decreases in emitted behavior that were reversible with analgesic treatment. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): We evaluated our system through a direct comparison on the same subjects with the current "gold standard" of human observation of video recordings. Using the same mice evaluated over the same range of behaviors, the Behavioral Spectrometer produced a quantitative categorization of behavior that was highly correlated with the scores produced by trained human observers (r=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that this new system is a highly valid and sensitive method to characterize behavioral effects in mice. As a fully automated and easily scalable instrument the Behavioral Spectrometer represents a high-throughput behavioral tool that reduces the time and labor involved in behavioral research.
Authors: Jill L Silverman; Daniel G Smith; Stacey J Sukoff Rizzo; Michael N Karras; Sarah M Turner; Seda S Tolu; Dianne K Bryce; Deborah L Smith; Kari Fonseca; Robert H Ring; Jacqueline N Crawley Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2012-04-25 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: B L Pearson; R L H Pobbe; E B Defensor; L Oasay; V J Bolivar; D C Blanchard; R J Blanchard Journal: Genes Brain Behav Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 3.449
Authors: Kathryn A B S da Silva; Marianne Neves Manjavachi; Ana Flávia Paszcuk; Marcos Pivatto; Claudio Viegas; Vanderlan S Bolzani; João B Calixto Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: C Z Zhu; C D Mills; G C Hsieh; C Zhong; J Mikusa; L G Lewis; D Gauvin; C-H Lee; M W Decker; A W Bannon; L E Rueter; S K Joshi Journal: Eur J Pain Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 3.931
Authors: Evan Kyzar; Siddharth Gaikwad; Andrew Roth; Jeremy Green; Mimi Pham; Adam Stewart; Yiqing Liang; Vikrant Kobla; Allan V Kalueff Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2011-08-05 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Erik M DeBoer; Ricardo Azevedo; Taylor A Vega; Jesse Brodkin; Wado Akamatsu; Hideyuki Okano; George C Wagner; Mladen-Roko Rasin Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2014-03-05 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Katrina L Paumier; Stacey J Sukoff Rizzo; Zdenek Berger; Yi Chen; Cathleen Gonzales; Edward Kaftan; Li Li; Susan Lotarski; Michael Monaghan; Wei Shen; Polina Stolyar; Dmytro Vasilyev; Margaret Zaleska; Warren D Hirst; John Dunlop Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Elizabeth S Smith; Dani R Smith; Charlotte Eyring; Maria Braileanu; Karen S Smith-Connor; Yew Ei Tan; Amanda Y Fowler; Gloria E Hoffman; Michael V Johnston; Sujatha Kannan; Mary E Blue Journal: Neurobiol Learn Mem Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 2.877
Authors: Megan O Jacus; Richard J Rahija; Abigail D Davis; Stacy L Throm; Clinton F Stewart Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Thijs Houben; Inge Cm Loonen; Serapio M Baca; Maarten Schenke; Johanna H Meijer; Michel D Ferrari; Gisela M Terwindt; Rob A Voskuyl; Andrew Charles; Arn Mjm van den Maagdenberg; Else A Tolner Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Luke G McVeigh; Anthony J Perugini; Jill C Fehrenbacher; Fletcher A White; Melissa A Kacena Journal: Curr Osteoporos Rep Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 5.096
Authors: Elise V Mike; Hadijat M Makinde; Maria Gulinello; Kamala Vanarsa; Leal Herlitz; Gaurav Gadhvi; Deborah R Winter; Chandra Mohan; John G Hanly; C C Mok; Carla M Cuda; Chaim Putterman Journal: J Autoimmun Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 7.094