I have performed behavioral tests of open field, elevated plus maze and novel bject recognition in my test mice in CD1 background. Interestingly, these mice didn't show any change in Elevated plus maze test. However in open field they traversed less in the central area of the open field. This was significant. The same difference was there in C57 background also. In novel object the test mice stayed more in proximity of the older object as compared to the novel object. I interpret it as mild anxiety which may be driven by novelty associated fear. However there still remains the question of the mice not showing any changes as compared to control mice in Elevated plus maze. Can someone help me alternate interpretation?An alternate explanation would be immensely helpful. I haven't performed EPM on c57 background. Only open field has been carried out.
The open field test (OFT) is not quite a good test to evaluate anxiety, I would be careful with this kind of interpretation. OFT is more useful for locomotor measurements than it is to anxiety. The novel object recognition is better fitted for memory evaluation, so the interpretation about anxiety in this test should be also done with good care, maybe the novelty suppressed feeding would be better for anxiety measurements. Elevated plus-maze is a considerably good test and widely used for anxiety behavior, so if you do not see any difference at this test it indicates better that you drug or treatment/manipulation does not have a strong effect on anxiety behavior control.
Therefore, you can consider run another behavior test which is better to evaluate anxiety-like behavior such as novelty suppressed feeding or the radial maze to have a better profile of your animals behavior. As your results do not show an effect with the EPM it might be better to run more tests to confirm the effects you saw with OFT and NOR.
OFT is a good measure of locomotive and exploratory behaviour in rodents whereas EPM is a test of anxiety. So you should be very carefull in selecting tests for anxiety. Though reduced ambulation in the centre of OFT may be considered sign oh anxiety but the behaviour may be confounded by locomotion. So in my opinion consider using novelty induced suppred feeding and social interaction test for anxiety.
Thank you very much for your suggestions. @Laurel, I have used noldus ethovision for the analysis and have not videotaped, so I guess I cant go back to the data but I can always repeat it. @ Vitor and @Arun, I agree with you and thanks for pointing out NSF as another possible experiment. I shall be conducting it.
Just to add the existing question, I have checked for frequency of arm entries in case of elevated plus maze. I found that my test mice in C57 background do show a trend of increased frequency to enter the closed arms (p=0.07) as compared to the open arms. The overall time spent in closed/open arms are however not significantly different.
Consider to calculate open/enclosed arms time ratio and open/enclosed arms entries ratio as measures of amnxiety.
Consider to calculate open/enclosed arms time ratio and open/enclosed arms entries ratio as measures of amnxiety.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Microbiology
- Virology
- Virus