Effect of Morris water maze diameter on visual-spatial learning in different mouse strains

The Morris water maze task is a widely used tool to assess hippocampus-dependent learning and memory in rodents. Performance depends upon several factors including not only the traits of the experimental animals, but also apparatus and protocol characteristics. The present study aimed at investigating the effect of maze diameter on acquisition and probe trial performance in three commonly used strains: C57Bl/6, BALB/c, and 129/SvEvBrd mice. Three maze diameters (150, 120, and 75 cm) were used under identical protocol and testing conditions. Downscaling maze dimensions, hence reducing difficulty and stress levels, did not allow BALB/c mice, commonly known as poor learners, to acquire this visual-spatial learning task. C57Bl/6 mice performed satisfactory in all three maze settings, with superior probe trial performance in the 120-cm-diameter setting. Further downscaling of maze dimensions might even render this task too simple for this strain. If the 129S5/SvEvBrd background strain is preferred, testing of visual-spatial learning abilities should be performed in a small sized MWM pool, as this strain performed only adequately in the smallest maze setting. Attention is drawn to the importance of supplying a detailed description 129 substrain nomenclature in future studies. Generalization of observations from one strain to another and from data obtained with a specific strain and maze diameter to other maze dimensions should be dealt with very carefully. The present study emphasizes the importance of a well-substantiated choice of background strain and water maze characteristics when researchers plan to investigate visual-spatial learning and memory in a chemically/lesion-induced or targeted mutagenesis model.

[1]  J. Wehner,et al.  Differences between inbred strains of mice in Morris water maze performance , 1988, Behavior genetics.

[2]  R. Morris Developments of a water-maze procedure for studying spatial learning in the rat , 1984, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[3]  K. Goto,et al.  Task-dependent strain difference of spatial learning in C57BL/6N and BALB/c mice , 2001, Physiology & Behavior.

[4]  Muriel T. Davisson,et al.  Genetic variation among 129 substrains and its importance for targeted mutagenesis in mice , 1997, Nature Genetics.

[5]  Allan Collins,et al.  Behavioral phenotypes of inbred mouse strains: implications and recommendations for molecular studies , 1997, Psychopharmacology.

[6]  S. Kõks,et al.  Strain and gender differences in the behavior of mouse lines commonly used in transgenic studies , 2001, Physiology & Behavior.

[7]  David P Wolfer,et al.  Assessing the effects of the 129/Sv genetic background on swimming navigation learning in transgenic mutants: a study using mice with a modified β-amyloid precursor protein gene , 1997, Brain Research.

[8]  J. Wehner,et al.  Assessment of learning by the Morris water task and fear conditioning in inbred mouse strains and F1 hybrids: implications of genetic background for single gene mutations and quantitative trait loci analyses , 1997, Neuroscience.

[9]  I. Whishaw,et al.  Variation in visual acuity within pigmented, and between pigmented and albino rat strains , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[10]  Mathieu Wolff,et al.  Differential learning abilities of 129T2/Sv and C57BL/6J mice as assessed in three water maze protocols , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[11]  D. Cain,et al.  Testing hypotheses of spatial learning: the role of NMDA receptors and NMDA-mediated long-term potentiation , 1997, Behavioural Brain Research.

[12]  R. Morris Spatial Localization Does Not Require the Presence of Local Cues , 1981 .

[13]  R. D'Hooge,et al.  Age‐dependent cognitive decline in the APP23 model precedes amyloid deposition , 2003, The European journal of neuroscience.

[14]  E. Simpson,et al.  Revised nomenclature for strain 129 mice , 1999, Mammalian Genome.

[15]  S. Yehuda,et al.  The use of the Morris Water Maze in the study of memory and learning. , 1989, The International journal of neuroscience.

[16]  D. Wahlsten,et al.  Deficiency of the corpus callosum: incomplete penetrance and substrain differentiation in BALB/c mice. , 1989, Journal of neurogenetics.

[17]  Jacqueline N. Crawley,et al.  What's Wrong With My Mouse?: Behavioral Phenotyping of Transgenic and Knockout Mice , 2000 .

[18]  F. J. Staay Effects of the size of the Morris water tank on spatial discrimination learning in the CFW1 mouse , 2000, Physiology & Behavior.

[19]  J. Roder,et al.  Survey of embryonic stem cell line source strains in the water maze reveals superior reversal learning of 129S6/SvEvTac mice , 2003, Behavioural Brain Research.

[20]  K. Klapdor,et al.  The Morris Water-Escape Task in Mice: Strain Differences and Effects of Intra-Maze Contrast and Brightness , 1996, Physiology & Behavior.

[21]  P. Chapillon,et al.  BALB/c mice are not so bad in the Morris water maze , 2000, Behavioural Brain Research.

[22]  H. Anisman,et al.  Norepinephrine and serotonin alterations following chronic stressor exposure: Mouse strain differences , 1994, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[23]  J. Lassalle,et al.  Analysis of behavioral and hippocampal variation in congenic albino and pigmented BALB mice , 1994, Behavior genetics.

[24]  H. Anisman,et al.  Stress-induced disturbances in Morris water-maze performance: Interstrain variability , 1995, Physiology & Behavior.

[25]  R. D'Hooge,et al.  Applications of the Morris water maze in the study of learning and memory , 2001, Brain Research Reviews.

[26]  Victor H. Denenberg,et al.  A behavioral and neuroanatomical assessment of an inbred substrain of 129 mice with behavioral comparisons to C57BL/6J mice , 1999, Brain Research.

[27]  E. Kandel,et al.  Strain-dependent differences in LTP and hippocampus-dependent memory in inbred mice. , 2000, Learning & memory.

[28]  P. Deyn,et al.  Symptomatic effect of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine on cognitive deficits in the APP23 model , 2005, Psychopharmacology.