4.6 Article

Serotonin release in the caudal nidopallium of adult laying hens genetically selected for high and low feather pecking behavior: An in vivo microdialysis study

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 268, 期 -, 页码 81-87

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2014.03.050

关键词

Feather pecking; Serotonin; Genetic selection; In vivo microdialysis; Caudal nidopallium; Adult White Leghorn

资金

  1. 'The Value of Animal Welfare' of The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) [827.09.020]
  2. Ministry of Economic Affairs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Severe feather pecking (FP) is a detrimental behavior causing welfare problems in laying hens. Divergent genetic selection for FP in White Leghorns resulted in strong differences in FP incidences between lines. More recently, it was shown that the high FP (HFP) birds have increased locomotor activity as compared to hens of the low FP (LFP) line, but whether these lines differ in central serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine, 5-HT) release is unknown. We compared baseline release levels of central 5-HT, and the metabolite 5-HIAA in the limbic and prefrontal subcomponents of the caudal nidopallium by in vivo microdialysis in adult HFP and LFP laying hens from the ninth generation of selection. A single subcutaneous D-fenfluramine injection (0.5 mg/kg) was given to release neuronal serotonin in order to investigate presynaptic storage capacity. The present study shows that HFP hens had higher baseline levels of 5-HT in the caudal nidopallium as compared to LFP laying hens. Remarkably, no differences in plasma tryptophan levels (precursor of 5-HT) between the lines were observed. n-fenfluramine increased 5-HT levels in both lines similarly indirectly suggesting that presynaptic storage capacity was the same. The present study shows that HFP hens release more 5-HT under baseline conditions in the caudal nidopallium as compared to the LFP birds. This suggests that HFP hens are characterized by a higher tonic 5-HT release. (C) 2014 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