$6,900.00 – $7,900.00
The MazeEngineers Shuttle Box is a versatile tool designed for conducting both active and passive avoidance tests. It features dual independent grid floors that can be customized with various adverse stimuli. The top-loading door facilitates convenient access to the interior of the box. Inside, the cage is equipped with a sound generator and a visual stimulus (light), each controllable separately for different compartments.
Rodents are monitored using two distinct sensor arrays known for their high sensitivity and accuracy. The collected data can be analyzed using Noldus Ethovision software and seamlessly integrated with Neuralynx through Conductor Software.
Please note: An Isolation Chamber is not included with this system.
MazeEngineers offers custom-built behavioral mazes at no extra cost—designed to fit your exact research needs. Eliminate reproducibility issues from poor sizing or lingering scent cues with precision-engineered, modular, and smart mazes that adapt in real time to animal behavior. Publish new protocols, run adaptive experiments, and push the boundaries of behavioral science.
Mouse Shuttle Box Features |
2 Dual control speakers |
2 Dual control lights |
2 Dual control shock grids |
Top lid |
Acrylic plating: allow for adjustable contexts; black/black plating for active avoidance; and white/black plating for passive avoidance. (Remove plates for clear context) |
Note: Sound Attenuation Chamber sold separately |
Rat Shuttle Box Features |
2 Dual control speakers |
2 Dual control lights |
2 Dual control shock grids |
Top lid |
Acrylic plating: allow for adjustable contexts; black/black plating for active avoidance; and white/black plating for passive avoidance. (Remove plates for clear context) |
Note: Sound Attenuation Chamber sold separately |
Take advantage of Neuralynx, Ethovision Integration, SMS and Email integration with the Conductor Science Software. No I/O Boxes Required
The purpose of the passive and active avoidance tests is to evaluate learning in rodents in a control vs. disease model/intervention group, by assessing their fear-based conditioned avoidance behavior.
There are several versions of protocols to be used with the passive and active avoidance tests, varying in the apparatus used for the test, for example. Here, we describe a general protocol to be used with a shuttle box apparatus.
Avoidance behavior can also emerge without any external conditioned stimulus (CS) if unconditioned stimuli are administered at consistent intervals (Sidman avoidance; Sidman, 1953). In this setup, the passage of time or time-related signals act as the CS. The door between the chambers remains open, and both chambers are kept dark. Every time the animal moves from one side to the other, the fixed inter-trial interval (for instance, 60 seconds) is reset. The unconditioned stimulus (US) is delivered only if the animal does not respond within this interval.
In more advanced paradigms, the animal may be required to perform a specific action, such as pressing a lever, standing, vocalizing, or covering a certain distance, to avoid the onset of the US and turn off the CS.
The data obtained from the passive and active avoidance tests is generally visualized by graphing the latency to avoid the aversive stimulus.
For the passive avoidance test, results can be presented by graphing the average avoidance latency for each experimental group.
For the active avoidance test, results can be presented in different ways depending on the chosen protocol. If the escape or avoidance latency is measured in consecutive trials until the criterion run is reached (e.g. 9 avoidances in 10 consecutive trials), results may be graphed as escape/avoidance latencies throughout trials (the time between the CS and the US defines the cutoff time between avoidance and escape behavior).
If the same number of trials is performed in acquisition and in the retention test, results can be graphed as the number of avoidances in 10-block trials.
Using graphs similar to these allows to compare the avoidance behavior between different disease or treatment groups and their effect on learning.
A key limitation of passive and active avoidance tests is their sensitivity to environmental stress and handling. This issue can be mitigated by reducing stressors as much as possible. For instance, minimize disruptions when transferring animals to and from the testing environment. The apparatus should be situated in a quiet or soundproof room to limit external noise during testing. Additionally, animals should be housed separately to avoid exposure to any vocalizations from the test subjects. Consistency in sensory stimuli is crucial, so variations should be avoided, and testing should be conducted at the same times each day.
Bures J, et al (1976). Techniques and Basic Experiments for the Study of Brain and Behavior. Chapter 3 – Learning and memory. Pages 91–169.
Herrnstein, R.J. (1969). Method and theory in the study of avoidance. Psychol. Rev., 76, 49-69.
Martini E, et al (2008). Design, synthesis and preliminary pharmacological evaluation of new analogues of DM232 (unifiram) and DM235 (sunifiram) as cognition modulators. Bioorg Med Chem, 16(23):10034-42.
Sałat K, et al (2017). Novel, highly potent and in vivo active inhibitor of GABA transporter subtype 1 with anticonvulsant, anxiolytic, antidepressant and antinociceptive properties. Neuropharmacology, 113(Pt A):331-342.
Sidman, M. (1953) Avoidance conditioning with brief shock and no exteroceptive warning signal. Science, 118, 157—158.
| Species | Mouse, Rat |
|---|
There are no questions yet. Be the first to ask a question about this product.
Monday – Friday
9 AM – 5 PM EST
DISCLAIMER: ConductScience and affiliate products are NOT designed for human consumption, testing, or clinical utilization. They are designed for pre-clinical utilization only. Customers purchasing apparatus for the purposes of scientific research or veterinary care affirm adherence to applicable regulatory bodies for the country in which their research or care is conducted.
