Description
Specifications
Mouse 3 Lane | Rat 3 Lane | Mouse 6 Lane | Rat 6 Lane |
Rod Diameter: 3cm | Rod Diameter: 9cm | Rod Diameter: 3cm | Rod Diameter: 9cm |
Touch Screen: 7cm | Touch Screen: 7cm | Touch Screen: 7cm | Touch Screen: 7cm |
Features
1- Specifications
⢠Angular Acceleration: 0.1-50 RPM
⢠Angular Speed: 0.1-99.9 RPM
Change in Increments of 0.1 RPM
⢠Run Time: 1-900 minutes
⢠Speed: Constant or Accelerating
⢠Acceleration time range: 1-4999 seconds
2- Soft Fall
- Precision Weight Detection
- Soft Fall insert
- Adjustable Height Insert
3- Live Screen
⢠7 inch Width Touch screen
⢠Live Display: Duration, Distance, SpeedData Inputs:
⢠Safe Save: Store 60 run results in internal memory without charge.
4- Data Excellence
⢠Browse and Easily Print any result set. Export via Excel
⢠Autocalculation of mean, std dev of rod duration, fall speed, distance.
⢠Data Inputs:
o lane independent tracking, auto start/stop
Introduction
The Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test is a behavioral task used in neuroscience to study social behavior by quantifying social motivation. Social behavior can be impaired in multiple conditions and disorders, including anxiety or autism spectrum disorder, for example (File, 1997; Moy et al, 2004).
Earlier social behavioral assessment paradigms have been effective in assessing a desire to seek social interaction in rodents, but the strength of such desire for social interaction has been difficult to measure. The strength of motivated behavior has traditionally been measured by training rodents in an operant paradigm involving food as the motivating factor (Matthews et al., 2005).
The Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test paradigm couples the assessment of social behavior with the measurement of the strength of motivated behavior, allowing a quantitative measure of social motivation to characterize social behavior. This is accomplished by training the test animals to associate lever pressing with a social reward. Then, animals are tested in a series of sessions in which the amount of lever presses required to obtain the social reward progressively increases across trials. This method therefore requires an increasing amount of effort to obtain a social reward, which can be used as an index of the motivation to obtain it.Ā By testing animals in a valence comparison paradigm in which they can choose between a social reward or a food reward, motivated behavior can also be compared across different reward types.
Using a fully automated version of the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test allows for a simplified procedure with improved rate of data collection and throughput. This test can be used to study the impact of neurological and psychiatric disorders, of genetic and environmental factors, and of therapeutic interventions on social behavior (e.g. Martin et al, 2014).
Apparatus & Equipment
The apparatus is made up of a box with two chambers (test chamber and target chamber) separated by an automated guillotine door. The guillotine door is modified by having a wire grid mounted to the face of the doorframe. The wire grid allows limited social contact but does not allow the animals to cross between chambers.
On the wall opposite to the door, there are two levers with a liquid food receptacle between them. The levers can be programed to either open the door or present a food reward.
The box can be fully automated. Its control, monitoring, and data collection can be performed through the Noldus EthoVisionĀ® XT software.
Training Protocol
The purpose of the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test is to assess social behavior in rodentsĀ in a control vs. disease model/intervention group by quantifying social motivation.
Below are examples of protocols that allow the assessment of social motivation. A more detailed version of these protocols can be found in Martin & Iceberg, 2015.
Pre-training for the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning
Animals can be housed individually or in groups, depending on the experimental needs.
Maintain animals on theirĀ ad libitumĀ diet. Although food rewards are used, food deprivation is unnecessary for operant conditioning with the use of an evaporated milk solution sweetened with 0.2% sucrose (Martin et al, 2014).
Test and stimulus animals should be age and sex-matched.
After a few days of habituation to the testing facilities, without handling or food restriction, animals should be handled daily for around 5 min, and for at least 3 days before beginning behavioral training.
Chambers should be cleaned between each testing session and after the conclusion of testing each day using 70% ethanol.
Evaluation of social motivation using the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test
Social Motivation Paradigm
Training
- Place the test animal in the test chamber and the stimulus animal in the target chamber.
- Train the test animal to press the levers to open the guillotine door using the method of reinforcement of successive approximations to the desired operant response. During the training procedure, deliver reinforcement by opening the guillotine door for 15 sec, thereby allowing access to the stimulus animal through the wire grid.
- Train each animal daily for 30 min until they reach a minimum response criterion (e.g. 10 lever presses in 3 out of 5 consecutive testing sessions).
- Animals that do not reach the minimum response criterion after 30 daily training sessions should be removed from the experiment and designated as non-learners.
- Alternate the stimulus animal used during training so that a different animal is used every other day.
Testing
- Place a trained test animal in the test chamber and a stimulus animal in the target chamber. During testing, use a pool of at least 10 stimulus animals to assign to each test animal so that stimulus animals are only repeated after 10 daily test sessions. Do not use stimulus animals used during training for the testing.
- Program the guillotine door to open on a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement so that the number of lever presses required to obtain the social reward (15 sec access to the target animal) increases by a rate of 3 in each trial.
- Program the test sessions to end when the test animal stops lever pressing for five consecutive minutes.
- Record the last reinforced ratio as the breakpoint and use this value as a measure of social motivation. Test each animal for at least 10 test sessions after limit performance levels are observed.
Ā
Valence Comparison of Social Vs Food Reward
After all animals complete the social motivation paradigm, test these same animals to compare the valence of the social reward with that of a food reward.
Training
- Program one lever to open the guillotine door and present the social reward for 15 sec and the other lever to present a liquid food reward for 15 sec.
- In each testing group, assign half of the animals to a left lever/food reward and right lever/social reward contingency and the other half to the opposite contingency. Assign test animals to alternate between contingencies to control for potential lever biases among animals.
- Place a test animal in the test chamber and place a stimulus animal in the target chamber.
- Make only one lever/reward contingency active during each training session. Perform daily 1-hour sessions for 6 days that alternate between contingencies each day. Alternate stimulus animals assigned to each test animal every other session.
Testing
- Program the schedule of reinforcement at a fixed ratio of 3:1, so that every third lever press is reinforced, but only by its respective associated reward.
- Program test sessions to run for 1 hour.
- Place a test animal in the test chamber and place a stimulus animal in the target chamber.
- Test the animals daily after the 6 days of training until at least 10 sessions following the observation of limit performance levels. The total number of lever presses for each reward type is used for valence comparison.
Modifications
Prior social motivation paradigms required the presence of an experimenter for the control of reward delivery. This modified version allows a fully automated Social Motivation Operant Conditioning paradigm and thereby eliminates the possibility of behavioral interference due to the presence of an experimenter.
The use of a progressively increasing ratio of lever presses to reward gradually increases the amount of effort required to obtain the social reward, and thereby provides a better measurement of motivation.
Experimental protocols can be adapted so that the duration of training sessions, the increasing ratio of lever presses, or the amount of time that the social reward is presented can be optimized according to the experimental needs.
These social motivation operant conditioning paradigms can also be adjusted to experimental needs by measuring additional parameters, such as the location of each mouse in the chamber or specific behaviors (e.g. nose-to-nose contact or vocalizations during social interactions).
Sample Data
The data obtained with the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test can be visualized by graphing any of the behavioral measures described above: the breakpoint ā the last reinforced ratio of number of lever presses required to obtain the social reward; or valence comparison ā the total number of lever presses for each reward type.
Below are presented example graphs showing the effect of a disease model on social motivation. Further examples can be found in Martin & Iceberg (2015).
Using graphs similar to these to compare social motivation between control and disease or treatment groups allows for easy visualization of the effects on social behavior. Animals with impaired social behavior may be less motivated to press the lever more times in order to obtain a social reward.
Strengths and Limitations
The main disadvantage of the Social Motivation Operant Conditioning paradigm is that it is a labor-intensive and time-consuming method. However, the testing paradigm exemplified above couples the assessment of social behavior with the measurement of the strength of motivated behavior by progressively increasing the amount of lever presses required to obtain the social reward. Unlike several established paradigms to study social motivation, this test has the important advantage of allowing a quantitative measure of social motivation to characterize social behavior.
Summary and Key Points
- The Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test is used to measure social motivation as an index of social behavior.
- This test assesses motivation by progressively increasing the amount of effort required to obtain a social reward.
- The test can be adapted to collect data regarding different aspects of social behavior.
- Animal models of neurological of psychiatric conditions show impaired social behavior.
- The Social Motivation Operant Conditioning test can be used to characterize social behavior in animal models and mouse strains, or the impact of diseases and treatments on social behavior.
References
File SE (1997).Ā Anxiolytic action of a neurokinin1 receptor antagonist in the social interaction test. Pharmacol Biochem Behav, 58:747-752.
Martin L, et al (2014).Ā Validation of operant social motivation paradigms using BTBR T+tf/J and C57BL/6J inbred mouse strains. Brain Behav. 4, 754-764.
Martin L, Iceberg E (2015).Ā Quantifying Social Motivation in Mice Using Operant Conditioning. J Vis Exp, 102:e53009.
Matthews TJ, et al (2005).Ā Social and sexual motivation in the mouse. Behav Neurosci. 119, 1628-1639.
Moy SS, et al (2004).Ā Sociability and preference for social novelty in five inbred strains: an approach to assess autistic-like behavior in mice. Genes Brain Behav. 3, 287-302.