Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:24:56.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Housing conditions affect self-administration of anxiolytic by laboratory mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

CM Sherwin  and
IAS Olsson
CM Sherwin*
Affiliation:
Centre for Behavioural Biology, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Bristol BS40 SDU, UK Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology (IBMC), Rua Campo Alegre 823, 4150-180 Porto, Portugal
IAS Olsson
Affiliation:
Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology (IBMC), Rua Campo Alegre 823, 4150-180 Porto, Portugal
*
* Correspondence: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Tests of emotionality conducted outside the home-cage show that rodents from standard laboratory housing are more anxious than animals from enriched housing; however, it is not known if this also indicates increased anxiety within the home-cage. We used a novel method, recording the self-administration of a psychoactive anxiolytic, to examine home-cage anxiety levels of laboratory mice (three per cage) in Standard (n = 10 cages), Unpredictable (n = 10 cages) and Enriched (n = 6 cages) housing. The mice were given a choice of drinking either non-drugged water or a solution of the benzodiazepine Midazolam. There was a significant effect of housing on the proportion of total fluid consumed from the bottle containing Midazolam solution (P = 0.02). Mice from Standard and Unpredictable cages drank a greater proportion than mice from Enriched cages. This indicates that mice from the Standard and Unpredictable laboratory caging may have been experiencing greater anxiety than mice from the Enriched cages. There was also a significant effect of bottle position (P = 0.002). Mice from the Standard and Unpredictable cages drank a greater proportion of total fluid from the bottle containing Midazolam solution when this was toward the rear of the cage rack, ie in a location that was less susceptible to extraneous disturbance. Monitoring self-administration of psychoactive drugs as a method of welfare assessment could be applied to a wide variety of housing conditions, husbandry practices, or experimental procedures that putatively induce negative mental states. The major finding is that standard cages for laboratory rodents may induce greater anxiety than enriched cages. This is discussed in terms of animal welfare and the validity of data from animals housed in minimalistic environments.

Keywords

animal welfareanxiolyticenrichmentmiceself-administration
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , February 2004 , pp. 33 - 38
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Adams, N and Oldham, T D 1996 Seminatural housing increases subsequent ethanol intake in male Maudsley reactive rats. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 57: 349–351CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertoglio, LJ and Carobrez, AP 2002 Prior maze experience required to alter midazolam effects in rats submitted to the elevated plus-maze. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior 72: 449–455CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM and Johnson, KG 1993 Stress and Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapillon, P, Manneche, C, Belzung, C and Caston, J 1999 Rearing environmental enrichment in two inbred strains of mice: 1: Effects on emotional reactivity. Behaviour Genetics 29: 41–46CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamove, AS 1989 Cage design reduces emotionality in mice. Laboratory Animals 23: 215–219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colpaert, FC, De Witte, P, Mondi, AN, Awouters, F, Niemegeers, CJE and Jansen, PA 1980 Self-administration of the analgesic suprofen in arthritic rats: evidence of Mycobacterium butyricum-induced arthritis as an experimental model of chronic pain. Life Sciences 27: 921–928CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colpaert, FC, Meert, Th, De Witte, P and Schmitt, P 1982 Further evidence validating adjuvant arthritis as an experimental model of chronic pain in the rats. Life Sciences 31: 67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crabbe, JC, Wahlsten, D and Dudek, BC 1999 Genetics of mouse behavior: interactions with laboratory environment. Science 284: 1670–1672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruz-Morales, SE, Santos, NR and Brandao, ML 2002 One-trial tolerance to midazolam is due to enhancement of fear and reduction of anxiolytic sensitive behaviours in the elevated plus-maze retest in the rat. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behaviour 72: 973–978CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Danbury, TC, Weeks, CA, Chambers, JP, Waterman-Pearson, AE and Kestin, SC 2000 Self-selection of the analgesic drug, carprofen, by lame broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 146: 307–311CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dielenberg, RA and McGregor, IS 2001 Defensive behavior in rats towards predatory odors: a review. Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews 25: 597–609CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fish, EW, Sekinda, M, Ferrari, PF, Dirks, A and Miczek, KA 2000 Distress vocalizations in maternally separated mouse pups: modulation via S-HTIA, S-HTIB and GABA(A) receptors. Psychopharmacology 149: 277–285CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, JA and Westbrook, RF 1994 Effects of midazolam and naloxone in rats tested for sensitivity/reactivity to formalin pain in a familiar, novel or aversively conditioned environment. Psychopharmacology 115: 65–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jennings, M, Batchelor, GR, Brain, PF, Dick, A, Elliot, H, Francis, RJ, Hubrecht, RC, Hurst, JL, Morton, DB, Peters, AG, Raymond, R, Sales, GD, Sherwin, CM and West, C 1998 Refining rodent husbandry: the mouse. Report of the Rodent Refinement Working Party. Laboratory Animals 32: 233–259CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez, MM and Navarro, JF 1999 Effects of midazolam on agonistic behaviour in male mice. Psicothema 11: 367–374Google Scholar
McGregor, IS, Schrama, L, Ambermoon, P and Dielenberg, RA 2002 Not all ‘predator odours’ are equal. Cat odour but not 2,4,S trimethylthiazoline (TMT; fox odour) elicits specific defensive behaviours in rats. Behavioural Brain Research 129: 1–16CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moberg, GP and Mench, JA (eds) 2000 The Biology of Animal Stress: Basic Principles and Implications for Animal Welfare. CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes-de-Souza, RL, Canto-de-Souza, A, da-Costa, M, Fornari, RV, Graeff, FG and Pela, IR 2000 Anxiety-induced antinociception in mice: effects of systemic and intra-amygdala administration of 8-OH-DPAT and Midazolam. Psychopharmacology 150: 300–310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsson, IAS and Dahlborn, K 2002 Improving housing conditions for laboratory mice: a review of ‘environmental enrichment’. Laboratory Animals 36: 243–270CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsson, IAS, Nevison, CM, Patterson-Kane, E, Sherwin, CM, van de Weerd, HA and Würbel, H 2003 Understanding behaviour: the relevance of ethological approaches in laboratory animal science. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 245 264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pain, L, Oberling, P, Sander, G and DiScala, G 1997 Effect of midazolam on propofol-Induced positive affective state assessed by place conditioning in rats. Anaesthesiology 87: 935–943CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pakulska, W and Czarnecka, E 2001 Effect of diazepam and midazolam on the antinociceptive effect of morphine, metamizol and indomethican in mice. Pharmazie 56: 89–91Google ScholarPubMed
Pickup, HE, Cassidy, AM, Danbury, TC, Weeks, CA, Waterman, AE and Kestin, SC 1997 Self selection of an analgesic by broiler chickens. British Poultry Science 38: 512–513 (Suppl)Google Scholar
Prior, H and Sachser, N 1995 Effects of enriched housing environment on the behaviour of young male and female mice in four exploratory tasks. Journal of Experimental Animal Science 37: 57–68Google Scholar
Rockman, GE and Gibson, JEM 1992 Effects of duration and timing of environmental enrichment on voluntary ethanol intake in rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior 41: 689–693CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosa, VP, Vanderesen, N, Calixto, AV, Kovaleski, DF and Faria, MS 2000 Temporal analysis of the rat's behavior in the plus-maze: effect of midazolam. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior 67: 177–182CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roy, V, Belzung, C, Delarue, C and Chapillon, P 2001 Environmental enrichment in BALB/c mice — effects in classical tests of anxiety and exposure to a predatory odour. Physiology and Behavior 74: 313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannerud, CA and Ator, NA 1995 Drug discrimination analysis of Midazolam under a 3-lever procedure. 2: Differential effects of benzodiazepine receptor agonists. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 275: 183–193Google Scholar
Schrijver, NCA, Bahr, NI, Weiss, IC and Würbel, H 2002 Dissociable effects of isolation rearing and environmental enrichment on exploration, spatial learning and HPA activity in adult rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior 73: 209–224CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherwin, CM 2002 Comfortable quarters for mice. In: Reinhardt, V and Reinhardt, A (eds) Comfortable Quarters for Animals pp 6–17. Animal Welfare Institute: Washington, USAGoogle Scholar
Sherwin, CM 2004 The influences of standard laboratory cages on rodents and the validity of research data. In: Kirkwood JK, Roberts EA and Vickery S (eds) Proceedings of the UFAW International Symposium ‘Science in the Service of Animal Welfare’, Edinburgh, 2003. Animal Welfare 13 (Suppl): in pressGoogle Scholar
Soderpalm, AHV and Hansen, S 1998 Benzodiazepines enhance the consumption and palatability of alcohol in the rat. Psychopharmacology 137: 215–222Google ScholarPubMed
Sun, L, Falk, JL, Nguyen, KN and Lau, CE 2000 Post-injection delays in experimental chambers, but not in home cages, produce both sensitization and tolerance of operant behaviour to Midazolam: relation to pharmacokinetics. Behavioural Pharmacology 11: 133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Weerd, HA, Baumans, V, Koolhaas, JM and VanZutphen, LFM 1994 Strain-specific behavioural response to environmental enrichment in the mouse. Journal of Experimental Animal Science 36: 117–127Google ScholarPubMed
Würbel, H 2001 Ideal homes? Housing effects on rodent brain and behaviour. Trends in Neuroscience 24: 207–211CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed