Literature DB >> 31144017

The plus maze and scototaxis test are not valid behavioral assays for anxiety assessment in the South African clawed frog.

R Boone Coleman1,2, Kelsey Aguirre1, Hannah P Spiegel1, Celina Pecos1, James A Carr1, Breanna N Harris3.   

Abstract

There are no behavioral models for testing anxiety in amphibians, a group of animals widely used for developmental, ecotoxicological, and genetic research. We aimed to validate two common rodent paradigms, the plus maze and the scototaxis test, for use in the aquatic African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis). We predicted: (a) that frogs would prefer the dark, vs. light, portions of the testing arenas (face validity), (b) that this behavior could be altered with acute administration of anxio-selective drugs (construct validity), and (c) that time spent in the dark portions of the arenas would be positively correlated (predictive validity). Prior to testing, frogs were treated with fluoxetine (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor [SSRI]), desipramine (serotonin- and norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitor), caffeine (methylxanthine, adenosine receptor antagonist, phosphodiesterase inhibitor), saline, or were left unmanipulated. Each drug was administered acutely (1 h prior to testing; caffeine) or subacutely (24, 3, and 1 h prior to testing; fluoxetine, desipramine) at one of three doses. Plus maze and scototaxis testing were separated by 1 week; each frog completed both behavioral tasks and was treated with the same drug regimen prior to testing. Overall, both tests showed face validity, however, data suggest these paradigms lack both construct and predictive validity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Amphibian; Caffeine; Ecotoxicology; PPCP; SSRI

Year:  2019        PMID: 31144017     DOI: 10.1007/s00359-019-01351-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol        ISSN: 0340-7594            Impact factor:   1.836


  98 in total

Review 1.  Anxiety and affective style: role of prefrontal cortex and amygdala.

Authors:  Richard J Davidson
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2002-01-01       Impact factor: 13.382

Review 2.  Measuring normal and pathological anxiety-like behaviour in mice: a review.

Authors:  C Belzung; G Griebel
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2001-11-01       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Effects of chronic antidepressants in an operant conflict procedure of anxiety in the rat.

Authors:  C C Beaufour; N Ballon; C Le Bihan; M Hamon; M H Thiébot
Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.533

Review 4.  Anxiety disorders: a review of tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Authors:  J Zohar; H G Westenberg
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl       Date:  2000

5.  The effects of sertraline and fluoxetine on anxiety in the elevated plus-maze test in mice.

Authors:  M Kurt; A C Arik; S Celik
Journal:  J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol       Date:  2000

6.  The gerbil elevated plus-maze I: behavioral characterization and pharmacological validation.

Authors:  Geoffrey B Varty; Cynthia A Morgan; Mary E Cohen-Williams; Vicki L Coffin; Galen J Carey
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 7.853

Review 7.  Effects of caffeine on human behavior.

Authors:  A Smith
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.023

Review 8.  Do animal models of anxiety predict anxiolytic-like effects of antidepressants?

Authors:  Franco Borsini; Jana Podhorna; Donatella Marazziti
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2002-08-08       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 9.  From Zebrafish to human: modular medical models.

Authors:  Jordan T Shin; Mark C Fishman
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2002-04-15       Impact factor: 8.929

10.  Response of larval Xenopus laevis to atrazine: assessment of growth, metamorphosis, and gonadal and laryngeal morphology.

Authors:  James A Carr; Angie Gentles; Ernest E Smith; Wanda L Goleman; Lina J Urquidi; Kerry Thuett; Ronald J Kendall; John P Giesy; Tim S Gross; Keith R Solomon; Glen Van Der Kraak
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.