Open field (animal test)
Developed by Calvin S. Hall, the open field test is an experimental test used to assay general locomotor activity levels, anxiety, and willingness to explore in animals (usually rodents) in scientific research.[1][2][3][4] However, the extent to which behavior in the open field measures anxiety is controversial.[5] The open field test can be used to assess memory by evaluating the ability of the animal to recognize a stimulus or object. Another animal test that is used to assess memory using that same concept is the novel object recognition test.[6]
Concept
[edit]Animals such as rats and mice display a natural aversion to brightly lit open areas. However, they also have a drive to explore a perceived threatening stimulus. Decreased levels of anxiety lead to increased exploratory behavior. Increased anxiety will result in less locomotion and a preference to stay close to the walls of the field (thigmotaxis).[7][4]
Experimental design
[edit]
The open field is an arena with walls to prevent escape. Commonly, the field is marked with a grid and square crossings. The center of the field is marked with a different color to differentiate from the other squares. In the modern open field apparatus, infrared beams or video cameras with associated software can be used to automate the assessment process.[8]
Behavioral patterns measured in the open field test include:[9]
- Line crossings – Frequency with which the rodent crosses grid lines with all four paws (a measure of locomotor activity), sometimes divided into activity near the wall and activity in the center.
- Center square entries – Frequency with which the rodent enters the center square with all four paws.
- Center square duration – Duration of time spent in the central square.
- Rearing – Frequency with which the rodent stands on its hind legs in the field. Rearing-up behavior in which the forepaws of the animal are unsupported and the similar behavior in which the forepaws rest against the walls of the enclosure have different underlying genetic and neural mechanisms and unsupported rearing might be a more direct measure of anxiety.[10][5][4]
- Stretch attend postures – Frequency with which rodent demonstrated forward elongation of the head and shoulders followed by retraction to the original position. High frequency indicates high levels of anxiety.
- Defecation and urination – The frequency of defecation and urination is controversial. Some scientists argue that increase in defecation shows increased anxiety. Other scientists disagree and state that defecation and urination show signs of emotionality but cannot be assumed to be anxiety.
While the aforementioned characteristics usually have a straightforward physical interpretation when examined individually, they often fail to fully capture the complexity of animal movement patterns. Consequently, more advanced multiparametric models are necessary to uncover additional significant insights that may be obscured by the interactions among these characteristics. Recent research has demonstrated that anomalous diffusion in fractional Brownian motion (fBm) models can effectively characterize typical animal movement patterns through two distinct asymptotic scaling regimes, which are separated by a specific crossover point. This crossover point is shown to depend on the neurophysiological condition of the animal subjects involved in the experiments. Furthermore, the movement model identified in this study is linked to conventional parameters, such as level crossing statistics that describe zone transition events. This connection allows for the reproduction of scalar metrics traditionally used in the characterization of open field test results from a model-based perspective, thereby enhancing the interpretability of the results within conventional frameworks [11].
The paper[12] presents an early validation of an innovative animal tracking tool and a model-based approach to gait analysis. The methodology primarily leverages random walk class models, including fractional Brownian motion (fBm) and its modifications. These models have garnered significant attention in recent years for their applications in animal tracking and behavioral analysis. Unlike traditional approaches that rely on multiple movement parameters or artificial combinations of various models, the fBm-based models are characterized by a limited number of free parameters. These parameters are straightforward to interpret physically, making the models not only efficient but also intuitive.
Criticisms
[edit]The assumption that the test is based on conflict has been heavily criticized.[citation needed] Critics point out that when measuring anxiety each choice should have both positive and negative outcomes.[citation needed] This leads to more dependable observations which the OFT does not present.[citation needed]
When the test was first developed, it was pharmacologically validated through the use of benzodiazepines, a common anxiety medication. Newer drugs such as 5-HT-1A partial agonists and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which have also been proven to treat anxiety, show inconsistent results in this test.[7]
Due to the idiopathic nature of anxiety, animal models have flaws that cannot be controlled. Because of this it is better to do the open field test in conjunction with other tests such as the elevated plus maze and light-dark box test.[13]
Different results can be obtained depending on the strain of the animal.[4] Different equipment and grid lines may cause different results.[14]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Denenberg VH (July 1969). "Open-field behavior in the rat: what does it mean?". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 159 (3): 852–9. Bibcode:1969NYASA.159..852D. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1969.tb12983.x. PMID 5260302. S2CID 39079157.
- ^ Hall CS, Ballachey EL (1932). "A study of the rat's behavior in a field: a contribution to method in comparative psychology". University of California Publications in Psychology. 6: 1–12.
- ^ Stanford SC (March 2007). "The Open Field Test: reinventing the wheel". Journal of Psychopharmacology. 21 (2): 134–5. doi:10.1177/0269881107073199. PMID 17329288. S2CID 37028127.
- ^ a b c d Crusio WE (2013). "The genetics of exploratory behavior". In Crusio WE, Sluyter F, Gerlai RT, Pietropaolo S (eds.). Behavioral Genetics of the Mouse. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 148–154. ISBN 978-1-107-03481-5.
- ^ a b Sturman O, Germain PL, Bohacek J (September 2018). "Exploratory rearing: a context- and stress-sensitive behavior recorded in the open-field test". Stress. 21 (5): 443–452. doi:10.1080/10253890.2018.1438405. PMID 29451062. S2CID 19952338.
- ^ Antunes M, Biala G (May 2012). "The novel object recognition memory: neurobiology, test procedure, and its modifications". Cognitive Processing. 13 (2): 93–110. doi:10.1007/s10339-011-0430-z. PMC 3332351. PMID 22160349.
- ^ a b Ennaceur A (August 2014). "Tests of unconditioned anxiety - pitfalls and disappointments". Physiology & Behavior. 135: 55–71. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.05.032. PMID 24910138. S2CID 19974405.
- ^ Samson AL, Ju L, Ah Kim H, Zhang SR, Lee JA, Sturgeon SA, et al. (November 2015). "MouseMove: an open source program for semi-automated analysis of movement and cognitive testing in rodents". Scientific Reports. 5: 16171. Bibcode:2015NatSR...516171S. doi:10.1038/srep16171. PMC 4632026. PMID 26530459.
- ^ Crusio WE, Sluyter F, Gerlai RT, Pietropaolo S (2013). "Ethogram of the mouse". Behavioral Genetics of the Mouse. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 17–22. ISBN 978-1-107-03481-5.
- ^ Crusio WE (November 2001). "Genetic dissection of mouse exploratory behaviour". Behavioural Brain Research. 125 (1–2): 127–32. doi:10.1016/S0166-4328(01)00280-7. PMID 11682103. S2CID 28031277.
- ^ Bogachev, Mikhail I.; Lyanova, Asya I.; Sinitca, Aleksandr M.; Pyko, Svetlana A.; Pyko, Nikita S.; Kuzmenko, Alexander V.; Romanov, Sergey A.; Brikova, Olga I.; Tsygankova, Margarita; Ivkin, Dmitry Y.; Okovityi, Sergey V.; Prikhodko, Veronika A.; Kaplun, Dmitrii I.; Sysoev, Yuri I.; Kayumov, Airat R. (2023-03-01). "Understanding the complex interplay of persistent and antipersistent regimes in animal movement trajectories as a prominent characteristic of their behavioral pattern profiles: Towards an automated and robust model based quantification of anxiety test data". Biomedical Signal Processing and Control. 81: 104409. doi:10.1016/j.bspc.2022.104409. ISSN 1746-8094.
- ^ Bogachev, Mikhail; Sinitca, Aleksandr; Grigarevichius, Konstantin; Pyko, Nikita; Lyanova, Asya; Tsygankova, Margarita; Davletshin, Eldar; Petrov, Konstantin; Ageeva, Tatyana; Pyko, Svetlana; Kaplun, Dmitrii; Kayumov, Airat; Mukhamedshina, Yana (2023-02-02). "Video-based marker-free tracking and multi-scale analysis of mouse locomotor activity and behavioral aspects in an open field arena: A perspective approach to the quantification of complex gait disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease". Frontiers in Neuroinformatics. 17. doi:10.3389/fninf.2023.1101112. ISSN 1662-5196. PMC 9932053. PMID 36817970.
- ^ Ramos A (October 2008). "Animal models of anxiety: do I need multiple tests?". Trends in Pharmacological Sciences. 29 (10): 493–8. doi:10.1016/j.tips.2008.07.005. PMID 18755516.
- ^ Kulesskaya N, Voikar V (June 2014). "Assessment of mouse anxiety-like behavior in the light-dark box and open-field arena: role of equipment and procedure". Physiology & Behavior. 133: 30–8. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.05.006. PMID 24832050. S2CID 35795658.
