Article

Genetic independence of mouse measures of some aspects of novelty seeking.

Department of Behavioral Neuroscience, Oregon Health & Science University and Portland Alcohol Research Center, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, OR 97239-3098, USA.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Impact Factor: 9.81). 04/2006; 103(13):5018-23. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0509724103
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT High novelty seeking is a complex personality attribute correlated with risk for substance abuse. There are many putative mouse models of some aspects of novelty seeking, but little is known of genetic similarities among these models. To assess the genetic coherence of "novelty seeking," we compared the performance of 14 inbred strains of mice in five tests: activity in a novel environment, novel environment preference, head dipping on a hole-board, object preference, and a two-trial version of the spontaneous alternation task. Differences among strains were observed for all tasks, but performance in any given task was generally not predictive of performance in any other. To evaluate similarities among these tasks further, we selectively bred lines of mice for high or low head dipping on the hole-board. Similar to results from the inbred strain experiments, head dipping was not correlated with performance in the other measures but was genetically correlated with differences in locomotor activity. Using two approaches to estimating common genetic influences across tasks, we have found little evidence that these partial models of novelty seeking reflect the influence of common genes or measure a single, unified construct called novelty seeking. Based on the substantial influence of genetic factors, ease of implementation, and relative independence from general locomotion, head dipping on a hole-board is a good task to use in the domain of novelty seeking, but multiple tasks, including others not tested here, would be needed to capture the full genetic range of the behavioral domain.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
73 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study examines the consistency across apparatus of murine activity, anxiety and novelty seeking traits.The activity, anxiety and novelty seeking factor scores extracted from the study of Ibáñez et al. (2007) were correlated with several behaviours assessed in tests of activity and anxiety (photocell box and light–dark test; sub-sample 1=32) and novelty seeking (circular corridor; sub-sample 2=65).The activity factor predicted ambulation behaviour in all the apparatus used; the anxiety factor inversely predicted the time in the light side of the light–dark test, whereas novelty seeking predicted ambulation in the circular corridor.We have described three moderately consistent factors in mice, supporting the proposal that they could be considered to be homologous to the human personality traits activity, anxiety and novelty seeking.
    Personality and Individual Differences 01/2009; 46(1):3 - 7. · 1.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: [Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 14(1) of Review of General Psychology (see record 2010-04023-007). In the article, “Categories of Novelty and States of Uncertainty” by Jerome Kagan (Review of General Psychology, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 290–301), there is a printed error in Table 1. Table 1 should have the label “Expected” over the first set of columns titled Desired and Aversive and the label “Unexpected” over the second pair of columns.] The concept of novelty has acquired a large number of diverse referents over the past quarter-century as a result of new methods that permit measurement of a variety of biological and behavioral reactions to novel incentives in both humans and animals. As a result, the term has acquired varied meanings. This analysis of novelty makes four claims. First, the specific state of uncertainty that a novel event creates depends on its origin. Second, unexpected events that alter the immediate stimulus surround (called stimulus novelty) should be distinguished from those that are inconsistent with an agent’s long term knowledge (called conceptual novelty). Third, the critical features that render an event novel can vary with the agent’s intention to classify or to act on an object and the balance between these two frames changes with development. Finally, the state of uncertainty created when an agent must choose one response from two or more alternatives differs from the states provoked by stimulus and conceptual novelty. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
    Review of General Psychology 11/2009; 13(4):pp. · 1.78 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from