Literature DB >> 26876137

Stereotypic behaviour in standard non-enriched cages is an alternative to depression-like responses in C57BL/6 mice.

Carole Fureix1, Michael Walker2, Laura Harper2, Kathryn Reynolds3, Amanda Saldivia-Woo2, Georgia Mason4.   

Abstract

Depressive-like forms of waking inactivity have been recently observed in laboratory primates and horses. We tested the hypotheses that being awake but motionless within the home-cage is a depression-like symptom in mice, and that in impoverished housing, it represents an alternative response to stereotypic behaviour. We raised C57BL/6 ('C57') and DBA/2 ('DBA') females to adulthood in non-enriched (n=62 mice) or enriched (n=60 mice) cages, observing home-cage behaviour during the active (dark) phases. We predicted that being still but awake would be reduced by environmental enrichment; more pronounced in C57s, as the strain most prone to learned helplessness; negatively related to stereotypic behaviour; and positively related to immobility in Forced Swim Tests (FST). Compared to enriched mice, non-enriched subjects did spend more time spent being inactive but awake, especially if they displayed relatively little stereotypic behaviour. C57 mice also spent more time awake but motionless than DBAs. Furthermore, even after statistically controlling for housing type and strain, this behaviour very strongly tended to predict increased immobility in the FST, while high levels of stereotypic behaviours in contrast predicted low immobility in the FST. Being awake but motionless is thus a reaction to non-enriched housing that seems to be an alternative to stereotypic behaviour, and could reflect depression-like states.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Depression; Environmental enrichment; Forced Swim Test; Inactivity; Mice; Stereotypic behaviour

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26876137     DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Brain Res        ISSN: 0166-4328            Impact factor:   3.332


  10 in total

1.  Doing nothing and what it looks like: inactivity in fattening cattle.

Authors:  Sara Hintze; Freija Maulbetsch; Lucy Asher; Christoph Winckler
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 2.984

2.  Stereotypic behaviour predicts reproductive performance and litter sex ratio in giant pandas.

Authors:  Meghan S Martin; Megan Owen; Nathan J P Wintle; Guiquan Zhang; Hemin Zhang; Ronald R Swaisgood
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Conventional laboratory housing increases morbidity and mortality in research rodents: results of a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jessica Cait; Alissa Cait; R Wilder Scott; Charlotte B Winder; Georgia J Mason
Journal:  BMC Biol       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 7.431

4.  Nature calls: intelligence and natural foraging style predict poor welfare in captive parrots.

Authors:  Emma L Mellor; Heather K McDonald Kinkaid; Michael T Mendl; Innes C Cuthill; Yvonne R A van Zeeland; Georgia J Mason
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Bored at home?-A systematic review on the effect of environmental enrichment on the welfare of laboratory rats and mice.

Authors:  Paul Mieske; Ute Hobbiesiefken; Carola Fischer-Tenhagen; Céline Heinl; Katharina Hohlbaum; Pia Kahnau; Jennifer Meier; Jenny Wilzopolski; Daniel Butzke; Juliane Rudeck; Lars Lewejohann; Kai Diederich
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2022-08-18

Review 6.  A Review of Equine Sleep: Implications for Equine Welfare.

Authors:  Linda Greening; Sebastian McBride
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2022-08-17

Review 7.  Changes in Stereotypies: Effects over Time and over Generations.

Authors:  Patricia Tatemoto; Donald M Broom; Adroaldo J Zanella
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 3.231

Review 8.  Assessing the welfare of kennelled dogs-A review of animal-based measures.

Authors:  Zita Polgár; Emily J Blackwell; Nicola J Rooney
Journal:  Appl Anim Behav Sci       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 2.448

9.  Measuring affect-related cognitive bias: Do mice in opposite affective states react differently to negative and positive stimuli?

Authors:  Anna C Trevarthen; Sarah Kappel; Claire Roberts; Emily M Finnegan; Elizabeth S Paul; Isaac Planas-Sitjà; Michael T Mendl; Carole Fureix
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Evaluation of different types of enrichment - their usage and effect on home cage behavior in female mice.

Authors:  Ute Hobbiesiefken; Paul Mieske; Lars Lewejohann; Kai Diederich
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.