Impact of IVC housing on emotionality and fear learning in male C3HeB/FeJ and C57BL/6J mice
Open accessAbstract
Housing conditions are known to influence laboratory animal behavior. However, it is not known whether housing mice in individually ventilated cages (IVCs) to maintain optimal hygienic conditions alters behavioral baselines established in conventional housing. This issue is important with regard to comparability and reproducibility of data. Therefore, we investigated the impact of IVC housing on emotionality and fear learning in male C3HeB/FeJ (C3H) and C57BL/6J (B6J) mice housed singly either in conventional type II cages with wire bar lids (Conventional), or in IVCs of the same size, but with smooth, untextured lids (IVC classic), thus acoustically attenuated from external stimuli and with limited climbing facilities compared to Conventional. To evaluate the role of climbing, additional mice were kept in IVCs with lids having wire bars ("grid") added to the inner surface (IVC grid). Spontaneous behavior, sensorimotor behavior, and fear learning were measured. IVC housing reduced activity and enhanced anxiety-related behavior in both strains, whereas grooming latency was reduced in B6J only. IVC housing increased Acoustic Startle Response in C3H but not in B6J mice. The "grid" did not compensate for these IVC housing effects. In contrast, B6J mice in IVC grid performed best in fear potentiated startle while B6J mice in IVC classic performed the worst, suggesting that climbing facilities combined with IVC housing facilitate FPS performance in singly-housed B6J males. Our data show that IVC housing can affect behavioral performance and can modulate behavioral parameters in a general and a strain-specific manner, thus having an impact on mouse functional genomics.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Cage/tank/housing system (type and dimensions) affects fear learning.
“Cage/tank/housing system (type and dimensions) | Affects behaviour [177] and fear learning [178].”
From Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0 (2020) · cites this paper as [178]
The Fear Learning section (p. 15) reports different fear-potentiated startle performance across housing types in male B6J mice, supporting an effect of housing system on this measure of fear learning. The Abstract (p. 2) says the cages compared were the same size, so the paper does not establish an effect of cage dimensions. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Rampon, C., Tang, Y.-P., Goodhouse, J., Shimizu, E., Kyin, M., & Tsien, J. Z. (2000) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/72945 · Cited by 737 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Banbury Conference (1997) Mutant mice and neuroscience: recommendations concerning genetic background. Banbury Conference on genetic background in mice. Neuron 19, 755-9
- Brielmeier M, Fuchs H , Przemeck G, Gailus-Durner V, Hrabe de Angelis M, Schmidt J (2002) The GSF - Phenotype Analysis Center (German Mouse Clinic, GMC): A Sentinel-Based Health Monitoring Concept in a Multi-User Unit for Standardized Characterization of Mouse Mutants. FELASA Symposium, Vol. 11, pp 19-22
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0
Percie du Sert, N., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., Clark, A., Cuthill, I. C., Dirnagl, U., Emerson, M., et al. (2020) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411 · Cited by 2,677 · see citing works
York, J. M., McDaniel, A. W., Blevins, N. A., Guillet, R. R., Allison, S. O., Cengel, K. A., & Freund, G. G. (2012) · Brain Behavior and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2012.04.008 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kallnik, M., Elvert, R., Ehrhardt, N., Kissling, D., Mahabir, E., Welzl, G., Faus-Kessler, T., de Angelis, M. H., Wurst, W., Schmidt, J., & Hölter, S. M.
- Affiliations
- Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
- Helmholtz Munich (DE)
- Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Hölter, Sabine M.
- Venue
- Mammalian Genome
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 173-186
- ISSN
- 0938-8990 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-1777
- OpenAlex
- W2036055116
- Cited by
- 58
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- mediatum.ub.tum.de
- Licence
- Locations
- Mammalian Genome (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
- mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Keywords
- individually ventilated cages, emotionality, fear learning, fear-potentiated startle, anxiety-like behavior, acoustic startle response, strain differences, C3HeB/FeJ mice, C57BL/6J mice, single housing
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Anxiety, Behavior, Animal, Emotions, Fear, Housing, Animal, Learning, Male, Mice, Inbred C3H, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Motor Activity, Species Specificity, Reflex, Startle, Mice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review