Literature DB >> 29720295

Methods for Investigating the Motivation of Mice to Explore and Access Food Rewards.

Elin M F Spangenberg1, Anette Wichman2.   

Abstract

The emotional state of domestic animals is an essential component of the assessment of their welfare. In addition, sensitivity to various rewards can be a valuable indicator when investigating these states. We aimed to design an exploration test and a contrast test that did not evoke fear and anxiety in C57BL/6N mice but that instead were perceived as positive experiences and that might be used to assess sensitivity to various rewards. The exploratory arena had a larger central area and 8 smaller sections containing various objects. Motivation (measured as latency to enter the arena under conditions of increasing weight of the entrance door), anticipation (measured as latency to enter the arena under conditions of increasing delay in opening the entrance door), and the numbers of visits to the different sections were evaluated during a 5-min session in the arena. In the contrast test, after traversing a runway, half of the mice received a tasty reward (hazelnut cream), whereas the others received a neutral reward (food pellet) at the far end. Latency to reach the reward was recorded. After baseline training, rewards were swapped for half of the mice from each category for 3 d, to establish a negative and positive contrast. Mice were both motivated and showed anticipation to enter the exploration arena; after entering, they were active and visited many sections. In the contrast test, latency during the baseline period was longer for mice given the neutral reward compared with the tasty reward. Compared with baseline, latency during the postshift phase decreased for the positive-contrast group (neutral-tasty reward pattern) but did not differ for the negative-contrast group (tasty-neutral reward pattern). Overall, both tests seemed to be positive experiences for the mice and showed potential for use to investigate reward sensitivity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29720295      PMCID: PMC5966231          DOI: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-17-000080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci        ISSN: 1559-6109            Impact factor:   1.232


  22 in total

1.  Animal behaviour: cognitive bias and affective state.

Authors:  Emma J Harding; Elizabeth S Paul; Michael Mendl
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-01-22       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Mu-opioid receptor knockout mice show diminished food-anticipatory activity.

Authors:  Martien J H Kas; Ruud van den Bos; Annemarie M Baars; Marianne Lubbers; Heidi M B Lesscher; Jacquelien J G Hillebrand; Alwin G Schuller; John E Pintar; Berry M Spruijt
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.386

Review 3.  An integrative and functional framework for the study of animal emotion and mood.

Authors:  Michael Mendl; Oliver H P Burman; Elizabeth S Paul
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Frustration and perseveration in stereotypic captive animals: is a taste of enrichment worse than none at all?

Authors:  Naomi Latham; Georgia Mason
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Behaviour as a tool in the assessment of animal welfare.

Authors:  Marian Stamp Dawkins
Journal:  Zoology (Jena)       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Working for a dustbath: are hens increasing pleasure rather than reducing suffering?

Authors: 
Journal:  Appl Anim Behav Sci       Date:  2000-05-05       Impact factor: 2.448

7.  Does neophobia necessarily imply fear or anxiety?

Authors:  R Misslin; M Cigrang
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 1.777

8.  The free-exploratory paradigm: an effective method for measuring neophobic behaviour in mice and testing potential neophobia-reducing drugs.

Authors:  G. Griebel; C. Belzung; R. Misslin; E. Vogel
Journal:  Behav Pharmacol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 2.293

9.  Standard housed rats are more sensitive to rewards than enriched housed rats as reflected by their anticipatory behaviour.

Authors:  Johanneke E van der Harst; Anne-Marie Baars; Berry M Spruijt
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2003-06-16       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  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

View more
  2 in total

1.  Comprehensive Preclinical Assessment of Sensory, Functional, Motivational-Affective, and Neurochemical Outcomes in Neuropathic Pain: The Case of the Sigma-1 Receptor.

Authors:  Beatriz de la Puente; Daniel Zamanillo; Luz Romero; Alicia Carceller; José Miguel Vela; Manuel Merlos; Enrique Portillo-Salido
Journal:  ACS Pharmacol Transl Sci       Date:  2022-03-17

2.  Using approach latency and anticipatory behaviour to assess whether voluntary playpen access is rewarding to laboratory mice.

Authors:  Anna S Ratuski; I Joanna Makowska; Kaitlyn R Dvorack; Daniel M Weary
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.