Journal
JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS
Volume 234, Issue -, Pages 2-12Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.03.001
Keywords
Animal behavior; Open field; Validity; Automation; Home-cage testing; Ethology
Categories
Funding
- Agentschap NL (NeuroBasic-PharmaPhenomics)
- ICTRegie (SenseWell)
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Thanks to the discovery of novel technologies and sophisticated analysis tools we can now 'see' molecules, genes and even patterns of gene expression, which have resulted in major advances in many areas of biology. Recently, similar technologies have been developed for behavioral studies. However, the wide implementation of such technological progress in behavioral research remains behind, as if there are inhibiting factors for accepting and adopting available innovations. The methods of the majority of studies measuring and interpreting behavior of laboratory animals seem to have frozen in time somewhere in the last century. As an example of the so-called classical tests, we will present the history and shortcomings of one of the most frequently used tests, the open field. Similar objections and critical remarks, however, can be made with regard to the elevated plus maze, light-dark box, various other mazes, object recognition tests, etc. Possible solutions and recommendations on how progress in behavioral neuroscience can be achieved and accelerated will be discussed in the second part of this review. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available