4.6 Article

Validation of a 2-day water maze protocol in mice

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 196, 期 2, 页码 220-227

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.09.002

关键词

Aging; Novel object placement task; Novel object recognition task; Spatial memory; Alzheimer's disease; Sex differences; Water maze

资金

  1. FRAXA Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a 2-day water maze protocol that addresses some of potential confounds present in the water maze when using the aged subjects typical of studies of neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease. This protocol is based on an initial series of training trials with a visible platform, followed by a memory test with a hidden platform 24 h later. We validated this procedure using aged (15-18 m) mice expressing three Alzheimer's disease-related transgenes, PS1 (M146 V), APP(Swe), and tau(P301L). We also tested these triple transgenic mice (3xTG) and age and sex-matched wild-type (WT) in a behavioral battery consisting of tests of motor coordination (balance beam), spatial memory (object displacement task) visual acuity (novel object recognition task) and locomotor activity (open field). 3xTG mice had significantly longer escape latencies in the memory trial of the 2-day water maze test than WT and than their own baseline performance in the last visible platform trial. In addition, this protocol had improved sensitivity compared to a typical probe trial, since no significant differences between genotypes were evident in a probe trial conducted 24 h after the final training trial. The 2-day procedure also resulted in good reliability between cohorts, and controlled for non-cognitive factors that can confound water maze assessments of memory, such as the significantly lower locomotor activity evident in the 3xTG mice. A further benefit of this method is that large numbers of animals can be tested in a short time. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据