1994
DOI: 10.1016/0091-3057(94)90472-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ethopharmacological analysis of rat behavior on the elevated plus-maze

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
403
3
66

Year Published

2000
2000
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 762 publications
(494 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
22
403
3
66
Order By: Relevance
“…The 5-min test procedure began when the animal was placed in the centre of the maze, facing a closed arm. The percent of time spent in open arms and the percent of open arm entries were used as measures of anxiety-like behaviour, while the number of entries into the closed arms was used as an indicator of general motor activity (Cruz et al 1994). As previously described by Gehlert et al (2007), alcoholinduced anxiety was measured by treating rats (N=32) IP with 3.0 g/kg of 20% alcohol or vehicle (saline) and 12 h later running the elevated plus-maze (EPM) test.…”
Section: Alcohol-induced Anxietymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 5-min test procedure began when the animal was placed in the centre of the maze, facing a closed arm. The percent of time spent in open arms and the percent of open arm entries were used as measures of anxiety-like behaviour, while the number of entries into the closed arms was used as an indicator of general motor activity (Cruz et al 1994). As previously described by Gehlert et al (2007), alcoholinduced anxiety was measured by treating rats (N=32) IP with 3.0 g/kg of 20% alcohol or vehicle (saline) and 12 h later running the elevated plus-maze (EPM) test.…”
Section: Alcohol-induced Anxietymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difference in minimal effective doses between both elevated plus-maze experiments (ie, 0.3 vs 10 mg/kg) is unclear, but can be explained by the use of different species (ie, mouse vs rat), different experimental conditions (ie, stressed vs non-stressed animals) and/or different timing of administration (ie, 60 vs 90 min). The absence of significant alterations in the number of closed arm entries (a reliable measure of locomotor activity; Cruz et al, 1994) in the elevated plusmaze and in the distance traveled in the social interaction test in gerbils indicates that the anxiolytic-like activity was observed at doses that did not impair motor activity. Moreover, it is unlikely that the positive effects of SR58611A in the punished drinking test are due to decreased sensitivity to electric shocks since compounds that are endowed with analgesic properties, such as morphine, are inactive in conflict tests (present results;Griebel et al, 2002b;Vanover et al, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The apparatus was wiped clean with water and dried after each subject. The primary measures were the percent of total arm time directed towards the open arms (ie, 100 Â open arm/(open arm + closed arm)), a validated index of anxiety-related behavior (Fernandes and File, 1996) and the number of closed arm entries, a specific index of locomotor activity (Cruz et al, 1994 Statistical analysis. To determine the time course of the effects of FG 7142 on total intake, two-way repeatedmeasures (dose and time) ANOVAs were performed on the incremental intake of food and water during 1-h time bins.…”
Section: Microstructural Analysis Of Ingestionmentioning
confidence: 99%