Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T18:25:43.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fear-Related Behaviour in Two Mouse Strains Differing in Litter Size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

A M Janczak ,
B O Braastad  and
M Bakken
A M Janczak*
Affiliation:
Agricultural University of Norway, Department of Animal Science, PO Box 5025, N-1432 Ås, Norway
B O Braastad
Affiliation:
Agricultural University of Norway, Department of Animal Science, PO Box 5025, N-1432 Ås, Norway
M Bakken
Affiliation:
Agricultural University of Norway, Department of Animal Science, PO Box 5025, N-1432 Ås, Norway
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present experiment compared the fear-related behaviour of a mouse strain selected over 101 generations for high litter size with that of a randomly selected strain. The H-strain, selected for large litter size, has a mean (± SD) litter size at birth of 21.5 ± 3.5 pups. The randomly bred C-strain has a mean (± SD) litter size of 9.6 ± 2.2 pups. The elevated plus-maze, the light:dark test and a resident:intruder test were used to measure how the mice responded to novelty. In the elevated plus-maze, a well-validated model of animal anxiety, the H-strain was significantly more anxious (having a lower percentage of entries into open arms) than the C-strain at 9 weeks of age. In the light: dark test, in which the light levels were similar to those in the home environment, the H-strain did not differ significantly from the C-strain in its avoidance of the brightest area. In the resident: intruder test, where aggression-trained, older H-strain males were the residents, 11-week-old intruding mice of the C-strain spent a higher percentage of their time in flight and immobility than intruders of the H-strain. There were clear anxiety- and fear-related differences between the strains, which may be related to their selection history. The results illustrate a need for further studies on the consequences of selection for increased production for the ability of animals to adapt to their home environment and cope with environmental changes.

Keywords

animal welfareanxietybehavioural strategyfearmouseselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , February 2000 , pp. 25 - 38
Copyright
© 2000 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bakken, M, Vangen, O and Rauw, W M 1998 Biological limits to selection and animal welfare. In: Haworth, L, Little, M and Schmidt, I (eds) Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 27 pp 381–389. World Congress on Genetics and Livestock Production: Armidale, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Beilharz, R G 1975 The aggressive response of male mice (Mus musculus L.) to a variety of stimulus animals. Zeitskift für Tierpsychologie 39: 141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beilharz, R G and Beilharz, V C 1975 Observations on fighting behavior of male mice (Mus musculus L.) Zeitskift für Tierpsychologie 39: 126–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beilharz, R G, Luxford, B G and Wilkinson, J L 1993 Quantitive genetics and evolution: Is our understanding of genetics sufficient to explain evolution? Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 110: 161–170CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beilharz, R G and Mitpaiboon, K 1994 Environmental limitation on fitness: reproduction of laboratory mice in benign and stressful (‘tropical’) conditions. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 111: 14–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benus, I 1988 Aggression and coping-differences in behavioral strategies between aggressive and nonaggressive male mice. Published PhD thesis, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bilkei-Gorzó, A, Gyertyàn, I and Lévay, G 1998 mCPP-induced anxiety in the light-dark box in rats: a new method for screening anxiolytic activity. Psychopharmacology 136: 291–298CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boissy, A 1995 Fear and fearfulness in animals. The Quarterly Review of Biology 70: 165–191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braastad, B O and Katie, J 1989 Behavioural differences between laying hen populations selected for high and low efficiency of food utilisation. British Poultry Science 30: 533–544CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadhurst, P L 1974 The Maudsley reactive and nonreactive strains of rats: a survey. Behavior and Genetics 5: 299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, D M 1991 Animal welfare: concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science 69: 4167–4175CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, D M and Johnson, K G 1993 Stress and Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, C, Costall, B, Kelly, M E and Naylor, J R 1994 Actions of 5-hydroxytryptophan to inhibit and disinhibit mouse behaviour in the light:dark test. European Journal of Pharmacology 225: 39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costall, B, Hendrie, C A, Kelly, M E and Naylor, R J 1987 Actions of sulpiride and tiapride in a simple model of anxiety in mice. Neuropharmacology 26: 195–200Google Scholar
Crawley, J N 1981 Neuropharmacological specificity of a simple animal model for the behavioral actions of benzodiazepines. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 15: 695–699CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crawley, J N and Davis, L G 1982 Baseline exploratory activity predicts anxiolytic responsiveness to Diazepam in five mouse strains. Brain Research Bulletin 8: 609–612CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruz, A P M, Frei, F and Graeff, F G 1994 Ethopharmacological analysis of rat behavior on the elevated plus-maze. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 49: 171–176CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
File, S E 1992 Behavioural detection of anxiolytic action. In: Elliot, J M, Heal, D J and Marsden, C A (eds) Experimental Approaches to Anxiety and Depression pp 25–44. Wiley: Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
File, S E, Zangrossi, H Jr, Sanders, F L and Mabbutt, P S 1994 Raised corticosterone in the rat after exposure to the elevated plus-maze. Psychopharmacology 113: 543–546CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gray, J A 1987 The Psychology of Fear and Stress. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK Hogg S 1996 A review of the validity and variability of the elevated plus-maze as an animal model of anxiety. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 54: 21–30Google Scholar
Hohenboken, W D 1986 Inheritance of behavioural characteristics in livestock, a review. Animal Breeding Abstracts 54: 623–639Google Scholar
Joakimsen, O and Baker, R L 1977 Selection for litter size in mice. Acta Agriculturœ Scandavica 27: 301–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A 1996 Fear and adaptability in poultry: insights, implications and imperatives. World's Poultry Science Journal 52: 132–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R B 1997 Fear and distress. In: Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O (eds) Animal Welfare pp 75–87. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Lagerspetz, K 1961 Genetic and social causes of aggressive behavior in mice. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2: 167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leshner, A I and Nock, B L 1976 The effects of experience on agonistic responding: an expectancy theory interpretation. Behavioral Biology 17: 561–566CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lister, R G 1987 The use of a plus-maze to measure anxiety in the mouse. Psychopharmacology 92: 80–185CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luiting, P 1991 The Value of Feed Consumption Data for Breeding in Laying Hens. Published PhD thesis, Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Agricultural University, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Luiting, P, Decuypere, E, de Groot, P N, Buyse, J and Room, G 1994 Selection for feed efficiency and consequences for stress susceptibility. In: 45th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production pp G5.7. European Association for Animal Production: Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
Luxford, B G, Buis, R C and Beilharz, R G 1990 Lifetime reproductive performance of lines of mice after long term selection for first parity litter size at birth. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 107: 188–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, I M and Nesse, R M 1994 Fear and fitness: an evolutionary analysis of anxiety disorders. Ethology and Sociobiology 15: 247–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, A D, Beilharz, R G and Hocking, P M 1997 Genetic selection. In: Appleby M C and Hughes B 0 (eds) Animal Welfare pp 219–231. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Nasello, A G, Machado, C, Bastos, J F and Felicio, F 1997 Sudden darkness induces a high activity-low anxiety state in male and female rats. Physiology & Behavior 63: 451–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellow, S, Chopin, P, File, S E and Briley, M 1985 Validation of open/closed arm entries in an elevated plus-maze as a measure of anxiety in the rat. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 14: 149–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plomin, R, DeFries, J C, McClearn, G E and Rutter, M 1997 Behavioral Genetics, 3rd Edition. Freeman: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Ramos, A and Mormède, P 1997 Stress and emotionality: a multidimensional and genetic approach. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 22: 33–57Google Scholar
Rauw, W M, Noordhuizen-Stassen, E N and Grommers, F J 1998 Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: a review. Livestock Production Science 56: 15–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rex, A, Sondern, J P, Voigt, S, Franck, S and Fink, H 1996 Strain differences in fear-motivated behavior of rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 54: 107–111CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodgers, R J 1997 Animal models of ‘anxiety’: where next? Behavioural Pharmacology 8: 477–496CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodgers, R J and Cole, J C 1993 Influence of social isolation, gender, strain, and prior novelty on plus-maze behavior in mice. Physiology & Behavior 54: 729–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodgers, R J and Cole, J C 1994 The elevated plus-maze: pharmacology, methodology and ethology. In: Cooper, S J and Hendrie, C A (eds) Ethology and Psychopharmacology pp 9–43. Wiley: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Rodgers, R J and Dalvi, A 1996 Anxiety, defence and the elevated plus-maze. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 21: 801–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodgers, R J and Johnson, N J T 1995 Factor analysis of spatiotemporal and ethological measures in the murine elevated plus-maze test of anxiety. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 52: 297–303Google ScholarPubMed
SAS 1986 SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 6 Edition. SAS Institute Inc: Cary, USAGoogle Scholar
Siegel, P B 1989 The genetic-behaviour interface and well-being of poultry. British Poultry Science 30: 3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trullas, R and Skolnick, P 1993 Differences in fear motivated behaviours among inbred mouse strains. Psychopharmacology 111: 323–331CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandenheede, M 1996 Fear reactions in farm animals: assessment, factors of variation and effects on welfare and productivity. Annales de Médecine Vétérinaire 140: 423–432Google Scholar
Vangen, O 1993 Results from 40 generations of divergent selection for litter size in mice. Livestock Production Science 37: 197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar