Literature DB >> 8728537

Plus-maze retest profile in mice: importance of initial stages of trail 1 and response to post-trail cholinergic receptor blockade.

R J Rodgers1, N J Johnson, J C Cole, C V Dewar, G R Kidd, P H Kimpson.   

Abstract

Recent research has shown that a single undrugged prior experience of the elevated plus-maze produces significant behavioural changes upon 24-h retest in rats and mice. Typically, when reexposed to the maze, animals display an increased avoidance of the open arms and a corresponding preference for the enclosed sections of the apparatus. Using ethological analyses, the present series of experiments sought to further characterize this phenomenon in mice and to determine whether or not it involves cholinergic receptor mechanisms. Results confirmed that behaviour during Trial 2 is markedly different to that seen on initial exposure, and that such changes are independent of the duration of Trial 1 (2 vs. 5 min). Retest behavioural changes included reduced entry latencies, reduced open arm entries, less time on the open arms and centre platform, lower levels of exploratory head-dipping, and increased entries into and time spent in the closed arms. The importance to the retest phenomenon of the first few minutes of initial exposure was further suggested by min-by-min analyses of the behaviour of animals naive to the maze. Results showed that behaviour during the first min is characterized by high levels of risk assessment from the centre platform and relatively low, but equal, levels of open- and closed-arm exploration. From min 2 onwards, however, behaviour showed a marked change with increasing open arm/centre platform avoidance, increasing closed-arm preference, and decreasing levels of risk assessment and exploratory head-dipping. Thus, it would appear that this within-session aversive learning transfers between sessions to account for behavioural profiles on retest. Irrespective of the duration of Trial 1 (2 or 5 min), posttrial administration of the muscarinic antagonist, scopolamine (0.1-1.0 mg/kg), failed to significantly alter the behavioural changes seen between trials. Data are discussed in relation to the apparent sensitization of fear produced by plus-maze exposure, its possible relation to phobia acquisition, and the need for further research on underlying mechanisms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8728537     DOI: 10.1016/0091-3057(95)02156-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacol Biochem Behav        ISSN: 0091-3057            Impact factor:   3.533


  8 in total

1.  Free versus forced exposure to an elevated plus-maze: evidence for new behavioral interpretations during test and retest.

Authors:  Vincent Roy; Pierre Chapillon; Mustapha Jeljeli; Jean Caston; Catherine Belzung
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2008-11-08       Impact factor: 4.530

2.  A five minute experience in the elevated plus-maze alters the state of the benzodiazepine receptor in the dorsal raphe nucleus.

Authors:  L E Gonzalez; S E File
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-02-15       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Palatable food reduces anxiety-like behaviors and HPA axis responses to stress in female rats in an estrous-cycle specific manner.

Authors:  Ann E Egan; Laurel R Seemiller; Amy E B Packard; Matia B Solomon; Yvonne M Ulrich-Lai
Journal:  Horm Behav       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 3.587

4.  The four-plates test-retest paradigm to discriminate anxiolytic effects.

Authors:  Nadège Ripoll; Bríd Aine Nic Dhonnchadha; Véronique Sébille; Michel Bourin; Martine Hascoët
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2005-01-26       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  A novel elevated plus-maze procedure to avoid the one-trial tolerance problem.

Authors:  Peggy Schneider; Ying-Jui Ho; Rainer Spanagel; Cornelius Rainer Pawlak
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 3.558

6.  Heterozygous neuregulin 1 mice are more sensitive to the behavioural effects of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Authors:  A A Boucher; J C Arnold; L Duffy; P R Schofield; J Micheau; T Karl
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2007-02-28       Impact factor: 4.415

7.  Context and strain-dependent behavioral response to stress.

Authors:  Katarzyna Nosek; Kristen Dennis; Brian M Andrus; Nasim Ahmadiyeh; Amber E Baum; Leah C Solberg Woods; Eva E Redei
Journal:  Behav Brain Funct       Date:  2008-06-02       Impact factor: 3.759

8.  The exploratory behaviour of rats in the hole-board apparatus: is head-dipping a valid measure of neophilia?

Authors:  Gillian R Brown; Christopher Nemes
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 1.777

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.