4.5 Review

Sucrose Preference Test as a Measure of Anhedonic Behavior in a Chronic Unpredictable Mild Stress Model of Depression: Outstanding Issues

Journal

BRAIN SCIENCES
Volume 12, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12101287

Keywords

chronic unpredictable mild stress; anhedonia; depression; sucrose preference test

Categories

Funding

  1. Russian Science Foundation [21-15-00103]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite numerous studies, the etiological and pathophysiological mechanisms of depression are still poorly understood. Chronic unpredictable mild stress is the most commonly used model, while the sucrose preference test is commonly used for assessing anhedonia. However, the reproducibility of the model and the relationship between animal and human anhedonia need further investigation.
Despite numerous studies on the neurobiology of depression, the etiological and pathophysiological mechanisms of this disorder remain poorly understood. A large number of animal models and tests to evaluate depressive-like behavior have been developed. Chronic unpredictable mild stress (CUMS) is the most common and frequently used model of depression, and the sucrose preference test (SPT) is one of the most common tests for assessing anhedonia. However, not all laboratories can reproduce the main effects of CUMS, especially when this refers to a decrease in sucrose preference. It is also unknown how the state of anhedonia, assessed by the SPT, relates to the state of anhedonia in patients with depression. We analyzed the literature available in the PubMed database using keywords relevant to the topic of this narrative review. We hypothesize that the poor reproducibility of the CUMS model may be due to differences in sucrose consumption, which may be influenced by such factors as differences in sucrose preference concentration threshold, water and food deprivation, and differences in animals' susceptibility to stress. We also believe that comparisons between animal and human states of anhedonia should be made with caution because there are many inconsistencies between the two, including in assessment methods. We also tried to offer some recommendations that should improve the reproducibility of the CUMS model and provide a framework for future research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available