That is, an anhedonic phenotype in the Sucrose Preference Test will not always positively cor- relate with passive coping in the FST or anxiety- like behav- iors in the Elevated Plus Maze, and vice versa. These data provide fascinating insight into individual variability in behavior within groups. Thus, this review analyzed overlap between use of the Tail Suspension Test, the Sucrose Preference Test, and anxiety- like measures (Elevated Plus Maze, Light- Dark Box, Open Field Test), in conjunction with the FST. Use a series of different behavioral tests in combination as to provide a broader picture of an animal's or group's be- havioral phenotype (Molendijk & Kloet, 2021 Nestler & Hyman, 2010). Molendijk and de Kloet then assembled a second data- set of FST literature from five behaviorally focused journals with large amounts of relevant publications to determine whether studies measuring different behaviors observe over- lap in their outcomes. Molendijk and de Kloet's analysis takes the pulse of the global scientific community's usage of the FST, allowing us to make predictions about the test's future in depression research. Scoring immobility as coping or “other” exhibited a slight increase, with a similar relationship to geographical re- gion (Molendijk & de Kloet, 2019). Pooling from a random selection of articles, the authors re- port a decline in interpreting FST immobility as depressive- like, particularly from European and North American regions. Here, they found that the use of the FST in publications is no longer increasing, indicating a shift in trend for the first time since the FST's inception. But what is the FST really measuring? Does immobility in this test really correspond to behavioral despair, serving as a reliable measure of depressive- like behavior? These are the questions that Molendijk and de Kloet thor- oughly explore in their latest review in the Special Issue ofĢ0 which use the FST, describing updated statis- tical assessments of trends in usage and interpretations over time, across countries, in different journals, and between dif- ferent behavioral outcomes. During the test session, animals quickly begin to float, exhibiting immobility behavior that has been inter- preted as behavioral despair, learned helplessness, passive coping, psychomotor retardation, anxiety, and even autism. The classic FST is a 2- day test where a rodent is placed in an inescapable container of water and must swim for 15 min on the first day and 5 or 6 min on the second “test” day twenty- four hours later (Porsolt et al., 1977, 1978 Yankelevitch- Yahav et al., 2015 Figure 1). Developed by Roger Porsolt in the 1970s as a rapid behavioral screen for antide- pressant compounds (Porsolt et al., 1977, 1978), the FST is now considered by some as “the gold standard animal test for depression” (Unal & Canbeyli, 2019). The Forced Swim Test (FST, also known as the Porsolt swim test) in particular has proven controversial. While animal models of depression and their accompanying behavioral validations are fundamental to de- pression research, they can also be a source of frustration. The symptoms of depression are heterogeneous and do not point to a single etiological origin (Nestler & Hyman, 2010). Even as incidence of depression steadily escalates (Akil et al., 2018), research efforts to understand its increasingly complex pathology and produce more effective treatments are stymied. Characterized by a wide range of symptoms involving dis- ruption of mood and cognition, depression is a leading cause of disability and contributor to economic burden (Ménard et al., 2016 World Health Organization (WHO), 2017). Depression is a prevalent, debilitating mental illness which affects over 300 million people worldwide and is often co- morbid with chronic illnesses or anxiety disorders (Ménard et al., 2016 World Health Organization (WHO), 2017).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |