Marcella M Cline1, Josh C Yumul1, Lisa Hysa1, Dalia Murra1, Gregory G Garwin2, David G Cook3, Warren C Ladiges4, Satoshi Minoshima2, Donna J Cross5. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. 4. Department of Comparative Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Electronic address: donna.cross@hsc.utah.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of forced-swim, rat-validated cognition tests in mouse models of traumatic brain injury (TBI) raises methodological concerns; such models are vulnerable to a number of confounding factors including impaired motor function and stress-induced non-compliance (failure to swim). This study evaluated the ability of a Radial Water Tread (RWT) maze, designed specifically for mice, that requires no swimming to distinguish mice with controlled cortical impact (CCI) induced TBI and Sham controls. METHODS: Ten-week-old, male C57BL6/J mice were randomly assigned to receive either Sham (n=14) or CCI surgeries (n=15). Mice were tested for sensorimotor deficits via Gridwalk test and Noldus CatWalk gait analysis at 1 and 32days post-injury. Mice received RWT testing at either 11days (early time point) or 35days (late time point) post-injury. RESULTS: Compared to Sham-treated animals, CCI-induced TBI resulted in significant impairment in RWT maze performance. Additionally, CCI injured mice displayed significant deficits on the Gridwalk test at both 1day and 32days post-injury, and impairment in the CatWalk task at 1day, but not 32days, compared to Shams. CONCLUSIONS: The Radial Water Tread maze capitalizes on the natural tendency of mice to avoid open areas in favor of hugging the edges of an apparatus (thigmotaxis), and replaces a forced-swim model with water shallow enough that the animal is not required to swim, but aversive enough to motivate escape. Our findings indicate the RWT task is a sensitive species-appropriate behavioral test for evaluating spatial memory impairment in a mouse model of TBI.
INTRODUCTION: The use of forced-swim, rat-validated cognition tests in mouse models of traumatic brain injury (TBI) raises methodological concerns; such models are vulnerable to a number of confounding factors including impaired motor function and stress-induced non-compliance (failure to swim). This study evaluated the ability of a Radial Water Tread (RWT) maze, designed specifically for mice, that requires no swimming to distinguish mice with controlled cortical impact (CCI) induced TBI and Sham controls. METHODS: Ten-week-old, male C57BL6/J mice were randomly assigned to receive either Sham (n=14) or CCI surgeries (n=15). Mice were tested for sensorimotor deficits via Gridwalk test and Noldus CatWalk gait analysis at 1 and 32days post-injury. Mice received RWT testing at either 11days (early time point) or 35days (late time point) post-injury. RESULTS: Compared to Sham-treated animals, CCI-induced TBI resulted in significant impairment in RWT maze performance. Additionally, CCI injured mice displayed significant deficits on the Gridwalk test at both 1day and 32days post-injury, and impairment in the CatWalk task at 1day, but not 32days, compared to Shams. CONCLUSIONS: The Radial Water Tread maze capitalizes on the natural tendency of mice to avoid open areas in favor of hugging the edges of an apparatus (thigmotaxis), and replaces a forced-swim model with water shallow enough that the animal is not required to swim, but aversive enough to motivate escape. Our findings indicate the RWT task is a sensitive species-appropriate behavioral test for evaluating spatial memory impairment in a mouse model of TBI.
Authors: D H Smith; H D Soares; J S Pierce; K G Perlman; K E Saatman; D F Meaney; C E Dixon; T K McIntosh Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 1995-04 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Christina Pettan-Brewer; Dylan V Touch; Jesse C Wiley; Heather C Hopkins; Peter S Rabinovitch; Warren C Ladiges Journal: Pathobiol Aging Age Relat Dis Date: 2013-10-04
Authors: Marcella M Cline; Megan A Ostlie; Chloe G Cross; Gregory G Garwin; Satoshi Minoshima; Donna J Cross Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: I Namdar; R Feldman; S Glazer; I Meningher; N A Shlobin; V Rubovitch; L Bikovski; E Been; Chaim G Pick Journal: J Mol Neurosci Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 3.444
Authors: Donna J Cross; James S Meabon; Marcella M Cline; Todd L Richards; Amanda J Stump; Chloe G Cross; Satoshi Minoshima; William A Banks; David G Cook Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Johannes Walter; Jannis Mende; Samuel Hutagalung; Martin Grutza; Alexander Younsi; Guoli Zheng; Andreas W Unterberg; Klaus Zweckberger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 3.240