Open-field behavior in muroid rodents

Wilson, Richard C.; Vacek, Thomas P.; Lanier, David L.; Dewsbury, Donald A.

doi:10.1016/s0091-6773(76)90901-9

Cited by 94 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The temporal (sequential) structure of locomotor behavior in voles reveals the same spatio-temporal organization that was described in wild and laboratory rats [9,11], and then suggested as applicable to various other species [5,6] including voles [7]. This similarity also accords with previous findings that open-field behavior in wild rodent species generally parallels that of laboratory and other domesticated rodent species [36]. Soon after being introduced into the open field, the voles establish a home-base, which is where they cumulatively spend the largest amount of time, and is also the most visited location.…”

Section: Temporal Structuresupporting

confidence: 81%

Open-field behavior withstands drastic changes in arena size

Eilam

2003

Behavioural Brain Research

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual voles were tested on successive days under increasing, decreasing, or randomly changing arena size. Locomotor behavior was adjusted to arena size by (i) preserving the same level of activity, (ii) taking longer but less frequent trips in smaller arenas in contrast to taking more frequent yet shorter trips in the larger arenas, and (iii) moving in the entire space available for exploration in the smaller arenas in contrast to remaining along the walls of the open field in the larger arenas. The effect of testing order was minimal, probably being related to increased novelty under increasing arena size, as opposed to habituation under decreasing arena size, when parts of the same area were re-explored. These behavioral changes averaged up to a two-fold difference compared with the larger six-fold change in the perimeter and 44-fold change in the area of the open field. The modest change in open-field behavior indicates that it has a solid spatio-temporal structure that withstands extensive environmental changes. This behavioral stability and consistency further validates studies of pharmacological, neurological, and genetic preparations that use behavior in a small open field as representation of the general pattern of behavior.

show abstract

Section: Temporal Structuresupporting

confidence: 81%

Open-field behavior withstands drastic changes in arena size

Eilam

2003

Behavioural Brain Research

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In comparing different species of rodents, Wilson et al (1976) suggested that the open-field test should simply be viewed as an analytical tool for assessing individual-specific behavioral reactions when introduced into a novel environment. Clearly, the open-field test does not give a simple index of the status of locomotor output (Stanford 2007; see also Garland et al 2011b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dewsbury (1980), Wilson et al (1976) and Webster et al (1979) measured both openfield and wheel running in 13 species of muroid rodents and found that the number of squares entered in the open field did not correlate significantly (among species) with either the mean number of revolutions in running wheels or the percentage of revolutions in darkness (see also reanalysis in Bronikowski et al 2001). Previous artificial selection studies that targeted either voluntary wheel running or open-field behavior did not find correlated responses in the other trait (DeFries et al 1970;Bronikowski et al 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Voluntary Wheel Running and Open-Field Behavior Correlated in Mice? Different Answers from Comparative and Artificial Selection Approaches

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Voluntary wheel running and open-field behavior are probably the two most widely used measures of locomotion in laboratory rodents. We tested whether these two behaviors are correlated in mice using two approaches: the phylogenetic comparative method using inbred strains of mice and an ongoing artificial selection experiment on voluntary wheel running. After taking into account the measurement error and phylogenetic relationships among inbred strains, we obtained a significant positive correlation between distance run on wheels and distance moved in the open-field for both sexes. Thigmotaxis was negatively correlated with distance run on wheels in females but not in males. By contrast, mice from four replicate lines bred for high wheel running did not differ in either distance covered or thigmotaxis in the open field as compared with mice from four non-selected control lines. Overall, results obtained in the selection experiment were generally opposite to those observed among inbred strains. Possible reasons for this discrepancy are discussed.

show abstract

“…We measured this behavior in the open field, where the fly is put in a novel, open environment and its movement pattern is monitored (Methods). These tests have been used for decades to assess exploratory behavior in many species (34,35), as well as in D. melanogaster more recently (36)(37)(38)(39). Walking exploration is an ecologically valid measure because flies spend a considerable amount of time walking on fruits and other substrates in search of food, mates, and oviposition sites (40,41).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gene–environment interplay inDrosophila melanogaster: Chronic food deprivation in early life affects adult exploratory and fitness traits

Burns

Svetec

Rowe

et al. 2012

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early life adversity has known impacts on adult health and behavior, yet little is known about the gene-environment interactions (GEIs) that underlie these consequences. We used the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster to show that chronic early nutritional adversity interacts with rover and sitter allelic variants of foraging (for) to affect adult exploratory behavior, a phenotype that is critical for foraging, and reproductive fitness. Chronic nutritional adversity during adulthood did not affect rover or sitter adult exploratory behavior; however, early nutritional adversity in the larval period increased sitter but not rover adult exploratory behavior. Increasing for gene expression in the mushroom bodies, an important center of integration in the fly brain, changed the amount of exploratory behavior exhibited by sitter adults when they did not experience early nutritional adversity but had no effect in sitters that experienced early nutritional adversity. Manipulation of the larval nutritional environment also affected adult reproductive output of sitters but not rovers, indicating GEIs on fitness itself. The natural for variants are an excellent model to examine how GEIs underlie the biological embedding of early experience.genotype-environment interaction | plasticity T he question of how individual differences arise is fundamental to biology, psychology, and precision medicine (1, 2). From studies on mammals, we know that early adversity places individuals on developmental trajectories for health and behavior that can last a lifetime (3, 4). However, for the most part, this idea has not been investigated in simple model genetic organisms, such as the worm Caenorhabditis elegans or the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, in which gene manipulation can be readily accomplished. Two biological mechanisms that can underlie individual differences, and that go beyond the obsolete notion of nature or nurture, are gene-environment interactions (GEIs) and epigenetics. Here, we explore GEIs in the context of early adversity. In particular, we address how early adversity interacts with natural variants of the foraging (for) gene to affect adult behavior and fitness in D. melanogaster.Within human populations, nutritional adversity can lead to substantive effects on cognitive and behavioral development (5, 6). The question of how early adversities perturb normal development is a difficult one, because both the strength and timing of adversity can matter. For example, in humans, detrimental effects are seen after chronic protein or carbohydrate deprivation, yet one or a few acute deprivations have little long-term effect (7). Similarly, in fruit flies, levels of hemolymph carbohydrate affected by 3 h of food deprivation return to normal levels after just 2 h of refeeding (8). Moreover, not all individuals are affected equally by early nutritional adversity (9, 10), and these individual differences arise from GEIs.In evolutionary biology, GEIs can be important for the maintenance and expression of both phenotypic plasticit...

show abstract

Open-field behavior in muroid rodents

Cited by 94 publications

References 18 publications

Open-field behavior withstands drastic changes in arena size

Open-field behavior withstands drastic changes in arena size

Are Voluntary Wheel Running and Open-Field Behavior Correlated in Mice? Different Answers from Comparative and Artificial Selection Approaches

Gene–environment interplay inDrosophila melanogaster: Chronic food deprivation in early life affects adult exploratory and fitness traits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About