Passive Avoidance in Gerbils as a Function of Location of Safe Platform

Galvani, Peter F.; Twitty, Michael T.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1976.38.3.778

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The extensive discrepancy in the parameters of the aversive stimulus implemented during step-down procedures with Mongolian gerbils (foot shocks) is especially striking. A survey of several studies has shown that the durations of the shocks have ranged from 0.1 s to 3.0 s, and their intensities have varied between 0.4 mA and 4.0 mA ( Amano et al, 1993 ; Galvani, Riddel & Foster, 1975 ; Galvani & Twitty, 1976 ; Himi, Ishizaki & Murota, 1998 ; Karasawa et al, 1990 ; Ko et al, 2009 ; Kudo et al, 1992 ; Matsuda et al, 1997 ; Pratt et al, 1994 ; Sim et al, 2005 ). Such diverseness in the parameters of the foot shocks is alarming in terms of its implications for the validity and commensurability of the associated findings ( Lewejohann et al, 2006 ) and compliance with principles endorsed by agencies that regulate animal experimentation—i.e., efforts to refine procedures to minimize pain and distress ( National Research Council, 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Mongolian gerbil emotional behavior: effects of two shock intensities and response-independent shocks during an extended inhibitory-avoidance task

Hurtado-Parrado

González-León

Arias-Higuera

et al. 2017

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite step-down inhibitory avoidance procedures that have been widely implemented in rats and mice to study learning and emotion phenomena, performance of other species in these tasks has received less attention. The case of the Mongolian gerbil is of relevance considering the discrepancies in the parameters of the step-down protocols implemented, especially the wide range of foot-shock intensities (i.e., 0.4–4.0 mA), and the lack of information on long-term performance, extinction effects, and behavioral patterning during these tasks. Experiment 1 aimed to (a) characterize gerbils’ acquisition, extinction, and steady-state performance during a multisession (i.e., extended) step-down protocol adapted for implementation in a commercially-available behavioral package (Video Fear Conditioning System—MED Associates Fairfax, VT, USA), and (b) compare gerbils’ performance in this task with two shock intensities – 0.5 vs. 1.0 mA—considered in the low-to-mid range. Results indicated that the 1.0 mA protocol produced more reliable and clear evidence of avoidance learning, extinction, and reacquisition in terms of increments in freezing and on-platform time as well as suppression of platform descent. Experiment 2 aimed to (a) assess whether an alternate protocol consisting of a random delivery of foot shocks could replicate the effects of Experiment 1 and (b) characterize gerbils’ exploratory behavior during the step-down task (jumping, digging, rearing, and probing). Random shocks did not reproduce the effects observed with the first protocol. The data also indicated that a change from random to response-dependent shocks affects (a) the length of each visit to the platform, but not the frequency of platform descends or freezing time, and (b) the patterns of exploratory behavior, namely, suppression of digging and rearing, as well as increments in probing and jumping. Overall, the study demonstrated the feasibility of the extended step-down protocol for studying steady performance, extinction, and reacquisition of avoidance behavior in gerbils, which could be easily implemented in a commercially available system. The observation that 1.0 mA shocks produced a clear and consistent avoidance behavior suggests that implementation of higher intensities is unnecessary for reproducing aversive-conditioning effects in this species. The observed patterning of freezing, platform descents, and exploratory responses produced by the change from random to periodic shocks may relate to the active defensive system of the gerbil. Of special interest is the probing behavior, which could be interpreted as risk assessment and has not been reported in other rodent species exposed to step-down and similar tasks.

show abstract