Literature DB >> 34400349

Genetic background determines behavioral responses during fear conditioning.

L R Seemiller1, S M Mooney-Leber2, E Henry1, A McGarvey1, A Druffner1, G Peltz3, T J Gould4.   

Abstract

Freezing behavior is used as a measure of a rodent's ability to learn during fear conditioning. However, it is possible that the expression of other behaviors may compete with freezing, particularly in rodent populations that have not been thoroughly studied in this context. Rearing and grooming are complex behaviors that are frequently exhibited by mice during fear conditioning. Both behaviors have been shown to be stress-sensitive, and the expression of these behaviors is dependent upon strain background. To better understand how genetic background impacts behavioral responses during fear conditioning, we examined freezing, rearing, and grooming frequencies prior to fear conditioning training and across different stages of fear conditioning testing in male mice from eight inbred mouse strains (C57BL/6J, DBA/2J, FVB/NJ, SWR/J, BTBR T + ltpr3Tf/J, SM/J, LP/J, 129S1/SvlmJ) that exhibited diverse freezing responses. We found that genetic background determined rearing and grooming expression throughout fear conditioning, and their patterns of expression across stages of fear conditioning were strain dependent. Using publicly available SNP data, we found that polymorphisms in Dab1, a gene that is implicated in both grooming and learning phenotypes, separated the strains with high contextual grooming from the others using a hierarchical clustering analysis. This suggested a potential genetic mechanism for the observed behavioral differences. These findings demonstrate that genetic background determines behavioral responses during fear conditioning and suggest that shared genetic substrates underlie fear conditioning behaviors.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Behavior; Fear conditioning; Freezing; Genetics; Grooming; Rearing

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34400349      PMCID: PMC8572373          DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2021.107501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem        ISSN: 1074-7427            Impact factor:   3.109


  47 in total

1.  Distinct gene expression profiles in hippocampus and amygdala after fear conditioning.

Authors:  Bing Mei; Chunxia Li; Suzhen Dong; Cecilia H Jiang; Huimin Wang; Yinghe Hu
Journal:  Brain Res Bull       Date:  2005-09-30       Impact factor: 4.077

2.  Analyzing grooming microstructure in neurobehavioral experiments.

Authors:  Allan V Kalueff; J Wayne Aldridge; Justin L LaPorte; Dennis L Murphy; Pentti Tuohimaa
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 13.491

3.  Differences between inbred strains of mice in Morris water maze performance.

Authors:  M Upchurch; J M Wehner
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 2.805

4.  Force transducer-based movement detection in fear conditioning in mice: a comparative analysis.

Authors:  Thomas Fitch; Benjamin Adams; Stephen Chaney; Robert Gerlai
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.899

5.  Withdrawal from chronic nicotine administration impairs contextual fear conditioning in C57BL/6 mice.

Authors:  Jennifer A Davis; John R James; Steven J Siegel; Thomas J Gould
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-09-21       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Assessment of learning by the Morris water task and fear conditioning in inbred mouse strains and F1 hybrids: implications of genetic background for single gene mutations and quantitative trait loci analyses.

Authors:  E H Owen; S F Logue; D L Rasmussen; J M Wehner
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.590

7.  Learning, memory and search strategies of inbred mouse strains with different visual abilities in the Barnes maze.

Authors:  Timothy P O'Leary; Vicki Savoie; Richard E Brown
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 8.  Neurobiology of rodent self-grooming and its value for translational neuroscience.

Authors:  Allan V Kalueff; Adam Michael Stewart; Cai Song; Kent C Berridge; Ann M Graybiel; John C Fentress
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 34.870

9.  Abnormal grooming activity in Dab1(scm) (scrambler) mutant mice.

Authors:  C Strazielle; A Lefevre; C Jacquelin; R Lalonde
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Delay and trace fear conditioning in C57BL/6 and DBA/2 mice: issues of measurement and performance.

Authors:  Megan E Tipps; Jonathan D Raybuck; Kari J Buck; K Matthew Lattal
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 2.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.