Evidence Hub

Dopamine transporter knockdown mice in the behavioral pattern monitor: A robust, reproducible model for mania-relevant behaviors

Kwiatkowski MA, Hellemann G, Sugar CA, Cope ZA, Minassian A, Perry W, Geyer MA, Young JW

Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior, 2019

17 citations

Abstract

Efforts to replicate results from both basic and clinical models have highlighted problems with reproducibility in science. In psychiatry, reproducibility issues are compounded because the complex behavioral syndromes make many disorders challenging to model. We develop translatable tasks that quantitatively measure psychiatry-relevant behaviors across species. The behavioral pattern monitor (BPM) was designed to analyze exploratory behaviors, which are altered in patients with bipolar disorder (BD), especially during mania episodes. We have repeatedly assessed the behavioral effects of reduced dopamine transporter (DAT) expression in the BPM using a DAT knockdown (KD) mouse line (~10% normal expression). DAT KD mice exhibit a profile in the BPM consistent with acutely manic BD patients in the human version of the task-hyperactivity, increased exploratory behavior, and reduced spatial d (Perry et al., 2009). We collected data from multiple DAT KD BPM experiments in our laboratory to assess the reproducibility of behavioral outcomes across experiments. The four outcomes analyzed were: 1) transitions (amount of locomotor activity); 2) rearings (exploratory activity); 3) holepokes (exploratory activity); and 4) spatial d (geometrical pattern of locomotor activity). By comparing DAT KD mice to wildtype (WT) littermates in every experiment, we calculated effect sizes for each of the four outcomes and then calculated a mean effect size using a random effects model. DAT KD mice…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free