Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Behavioural Brain Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bbr

Research report

The different baseline characteristics of cognitive behavior test between T

Mongolian gerbils and rats
Shiyuan Wanga, Dandan Fenga, Yinyin Lia, Ying Wanga,c, Xiuping Sunb, Xianglei Lib,
⁎
Changlong Lia, Zhenwen Chena, Xiaoyan Dua,c,
a
School of Basic Medical Sciences, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100069, China
b
Institute of Laboratory Animal Sciences, Cams & Pumc, Beijing, 100021, China
c
Department of Laboratory Animal, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100069, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Mongolian gerbil is a popular laboratory animal useful across many research fields. In the area of cognitive
Mongolian gerbil behavioral research the gerbil have been shown exhibit an anxiety-like profile on the elevated plus-maze, and
Behavior tests they could be useful as an animal model for testing anxiolytics and antidepressants. However, there are few
Open field test reports that thoroughly describe the behavioral characteristics of the gerbils in common cognitive behavior tests.
Elevated plus maze
In the present study, we used 7 behavior tests to detect the baseline characteristics of the gerbils and compare
Social interaction
Fear conditioning
them to the Sprague Dawley rats. Collectively, the gerbils showed significantly different behavior characteristics
in the open field test, elevated plus maze, grip strength, social interaction and fear conditioning compared to the
rats. However, no difference was found between gerbils and rats in sucrose preference or Barnes maze test. The
data showed that the Mongolian gerbil exhibited higher social interaction and exploratory activity, but lower
conditioning fear and grip strength compared with the rats. These results indicate that the gerbil may be a
sensitive animal model in behavioral brain research particularly in the areas of anxiety and fear.

1. Introduction
The Mongolian gerbil is a popular laboratory animal in many re-
search fields. As a laboratory animal with about 80 years history, it was
first captured in the basin of the river Amur, China [1]. The offspring
from these pairs were transferred from Japan to Tumblebrook Farm,
America where 9 specimens were bred in a closed commercial colony
and then have been shipped world-wide for scientific purposes. Since
then the gerbil has been used widely, especially in modelling human
disease. The gerbil is commonly used in studying strokes due to the lack
of communicating arteries between the posterior vertebral arteries
(through the basilar artery) and the 2 internal carotid arteries anteriorly
[2]. The relative simplicity of carotid occlusion makes this model
popular for the study of brain ischemic mechanisms [3]. Since 1996, the
Mongolian gerbil was found to be easily infected with Helicobacter
pylori [4], mimicking human Helicobacter pylori infection. Further, the
gerbil is useful for analyzing the underlying processes of gastritis and
gastric cancer [5]. The gerbil has also been used to study aging [6],
epilepsy [7], parasites [8], and viral infections [9]. More recently,
scientists have found that the gerbil is also a suitable model for studies
of neoplastic prostate lesions [10]. The gerbil prostate has compact
lobes, somewhat similar to the human prostate making this gerbil an
ideal candidate to model prostate disease [11].
In cognitive behavior researchers found that the NK1 receptor of the
Mongolian gerbil shared greater sequence homology with the human.
These animals were evaluated in the forced-swim test (FST) using
several standard antidepressant compounds [12]. The results suggested
that the gerbil is an ideal species for use in the FST. Another group [13]
demonstrated that gerbils exhibit an anxiety-like profile on the elevated
plus-maze. This suggests that the gerbil may be a useful animal model
for testing anxiolytics, and antidepressants with potential anxiolytic-
like effects. Currently, rats and mice are commonly used in the study of
neurological disorders such as depression, anxiety, autism, and neuro-
degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease(AD) and Parkinson’s
diseases (PD) [14,15]. Although gerbils are called multifunctional ex-
perimental animal, there are few reports of gerbils involved in the
cognitive behavior research field. Few reports exist to thoroughly de-
scribe the behavioral characteristics of the gerbil in common cognitive
behavioral tests nor are there reports comparing gerbils with more
popularly used animal such as mice and rats. So we characterized the
Mongolian gerbil compared to the Sprague Dawley rat to potentially
expand the use of gerbils in animal behavior research. In the present

⁎
Corresponding author at: School of Basic Medical Sciences, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100069, China.
E-mail address: duduyan@ccmu.edu.cn (X. Du).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.09.042
Received 5 June 2017; Received in revised form 19 September 2017; Accepted 25 September 2017
Available online 28 September 2017
0166-4328/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Wang et al.
study, we used 7 behavior tests to detect the baseline characteristics of
gerbil compared them to the rat. We conducted the sucrose preference
test which is used to test depression-like behavior and the grip strength
is used to test Motor coordination. To test anxiety like behavior we used
the open field and elevated plus maze test. We also tested fear memory
using social interaction test and spatial learning and memory using the
Barnes maze test.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Animals and housing
Ten male Mongolian gerbils (8 weeks old, 56–60 g) bred by our
research group [16] and six male SD (Sparague Dawley) rats (8 weeks
old, 180–200 g) purchased from the Beijing Vital River Laboratory
Animal Technology Co were used in the present study. They were
housed 2 or 3 animals in clean translucent plastic cages with the tem-
perature of 25 ± 1 °C and humidity of 55–65%, and maintained under
artificially illuminated light and dark cycle (12-h light/dark cycle) with
ad libitum access to standard laboratory diet and tap water. The size of
the cages was 40 cm × 25 cm × 20 cm (length × width × height).
Gerbils and rats were housed in the same size of cage. Gerbils and rats
were housed in different rooms with same environmental conditions.
All of the experimental procedures were conducted in accordance with
the Guideline of the Capital Medical University Animal Experiments
and the Experimental Animals Management Committee (No.AEEI-2017-
032). All 7 tests were performed in the following order: the first test was
the sucrose preference test, then the grip strength, the open field test,
the elevated plus maze, the social interaction (3-Chambered Social
Test), the Barnes maze test and the fear conditioning experiment. This
order of tests was determined by putting those with less stimulation
first to minimize the influence of the exposing animals to multiple tests
and also to reduce the number of animals used.
2.2. Open field test
The open field was a square empty environment, with a size of
50 cm × 50 cm × 30 cm (length × width × height). A central area
was drawn in the open field. It was centered in the center of the empty
field, with a square length of 16 cm zone. The fringe area was 10 cm
wide. The animals were placed in the middle of the central area and
observed for five minutes. Behavioral parameters including velocity,
distance traveled and the time in the central and fringe area were re-
corded by a computerized video tracking system (Ethovision XT;
Noldus, Information Technology, The Netherlands). The open field
apparatus was cleaned after each session using 70% ethyl alcohol and
permitted to dry between tests [17].
2.3. Elevated plus maze
During elevated plus maze (EPM) test, the maze was composed of
four arms. Two opposite closed arms (10 cm wide × 50 cm
long × 40 cm high) were enclosed by lateral walls, and the two open
arms (10 cm wide × 50 cm long) had no walls. The four arms were
connected by a central area (10 × 10 cm), and the maze was elevated
50 cm from the floor. The walls and floor were dark. At the beginning of
the test, the rodents were placed in the central area facing one of the
open arms. The level of illumination of the experimental room during
the sessions was 350 lx. The gerbils and the rats were placed on the
central square platform and allowed to explore the maze for 5 min. The
following parameters were recorded and analyzed: the number of open/
closed arm entries, the time spent in the open/closed arms, and the total
number of arm entries were recorded by a camera and analyzed using a
computerized video tracking system. The anxiety index was calculated
as open arm time and entries in relation to total time and total entries.
Open arm time percent (OT%) was calculated as time in the open arm/
29
Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34
300 s × 100. Open arm entries percent (OE%) was calculated as entries
into the open arm/(entries into the open arm + entries into the closed
arm) × 100. Meanwhile, the close arm time and entries in relation to
total time and total entries, as well as the number of stretch-attend
postures (SAP) (exploration of the open arm with the front part of the
body, while the hind region remains in the closed arm) were also
analyzed. These data were analyzed by an experimenter blinded to the
experimental treatments [18].
2.4. Sucrose preference test (SPT)
The sucrose preference test (SPT) were processed as following
briefly description: the animals were housed singly and were trained to
drink a 1% sucrose solution by exposing them to sucrose instead of
water for 24 h before test. After 15 h water and food deprivation for all
animals, each individual cage was provided simultaneously with two
weighed bottles whereas one of sucrose solution (1%) and another with
water. For the rats, the test lasted 1 h, the location of the bottles was
changed after 30 min. For the gerbils, the test lasted 10 h, and the lo-
cation of the bottles was changed after 5 h. At the end, both bottles
were measured and sucrose preference was defined as a measure of
sucrose solution consumed in relation to total liquid and represented in
percentage sucrose preference (%) = (sucrose solution consumption
amount/sucrose solution consumption + water consumption × 100)
[19,20].
2.5. Grip strength experiment
The grip strength task was evaluated by using a grip strength meter.
Without a prior training session for acclimatization, the gerbils and the
rats were individually put on the grip strength board. When pulled by
the tail, they grasped at the bar. Then the rodents instinctively grab
anything they can, to try to stop this involuntary backward movement,
until the pulling force overcomes their grip strength. The maximum
value of grip strength were recorded by Bioseb system. Each animal was
tested repeatedly three times and then the mean value was taken [21].
2.6. Social interaction (SI)
The social interaction behavior test (also known as 3-Chambered
Social Test) is the most commonly used experiment to assess autistic
behavior. This test was designed to assess social ability and commu-
nication of the animals. The size of the chamber was 45 cm wide,
105 cm long and 35 cm high. The diameter of the cage was 15 cm and
the height was 18 cm and the space between the cages was 35 cm. The
social interaction of each animal was tested with an unknown test
partner. Briefly, animals were trained on the first day in the central
room of social interaction cage for 10 min twice (before noon and
afternoon each time), the left and right room were empty. On the
second day, the test animals were put in the central room of the social
interaction cage, an unknown test partner was placed in the left room of
the cage as a stimulant animal, while the right room remained empty.
The experimental animals were observed for 10 min. The number of left
and right room entries, path length, time spent in the left and right
room, the latency stage and time spent in contacting (sniffing) with the
stimulant animal and in the empty cage were recorded [22]. When the
test was finished, they were carried out. The rooms were cleaned after
each session using 70% ethyl alcohol and permitted to dry between
tests. After 24 h, animals were still put in the central room of social
interaction cage, the left cage of room contained the stimulant animal
from the previous day. The right room contained another unknown test
partner (stranger). The animals were observed for 10 min and the
parameters were recorded as previously described.
S. Wang et al. Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34

Fig. 1. The results of OPF test. The data obtained from the OPF test (5 min) illustrated that (A) the time spent exploring the central area is higher for gerbils than rats and gerbil spend less
time in the fringe area of the OPF than rats; (B) the total distance traveled of the gerbils is also significantly higher; (C) the traveling velocity of the gerbils is higher than that in the rats.
The results obtained from the elevated plus maze illustrated (D) the open arm entries in relation to total entries and (E) the open arm time in relation to total time were dramatically
higher in the gerbils than that in the rats. The closed arm entries (F) in relation to total entries and the closed arm time (G) in relation to total time were dramatically lower in the gerbils
than that in the rats. The number of stretch-attend postures (H) were dramatically higher in the gerbils than that in the rats. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. MG, Mongolian gerbil.

2.7. Barnes maze
The Barnes was used to measure the time for each animal to find the
location of the escape box (30 cm × 11 cm × 11 cm). The Barnes maze
consisted of a circular light gray platform (diameter 120 cm) with 18
holes (10 cm diameter) evenly spaced at equal distance 6.5 cm away
around the perimeter from the edge of the platform. One hole was
designated as escape hole, and equipped with a cylindrical entrance
mounted underneath the maze providing access to an escape box (not
visible unless the animal approached the hole closely). Other holes
were equipped with identical cylindrical entrances, but without the
escape box. A red paper star acted as the visual cue space referent.
Lights mounted at the ceiling provided bright illumination (1000 lx). A
stereo speaker mounted to the ceiling provided background sound. The
animals adapted to the escape box for two minutes on the first day; then
received training sessions three time a day for four days. They were
placed in the center of the maze, five seconds later, the cylinder (box)
was pulled upward, and they could explore the maze to locate the es-
cape hole. Once the animal entered the escape box, they were left there
for 30 s. If the latency to enter the escape hole exceeded 180 s, the
animals were gently guided toward the escape hole and left there for
35 s. After each of them finished the experiment, the platform and es-
cape box were thoroughly cleaned with 70% ethanol. After 24 h, there
would be a 90-s exploration test, the escape box was removed and the
hole was identical to all 17 other holes. The cumulative duration, fre-
quency and latency to reach the entry zone where the escape box was
previously located was recorded. Similarly, the frequency to reach the
non-goal hole during a 90-s exploration test was recorded. In addition,
the frequency to reach the non-goal hole and goal hole during the
training sessions were also recorded. The data were collected by the
path traveled by each animal and was video tracked by an overhead
camera, and then analyzed using Ethovision XT Noldus Information
Technology, The Netherlands software [23].
2.8. Fear conditioning
Both contextual fear conditioning and cued fear conditioning were
performed. The animals were trained in a Plexiglas training cage within

30
S. Wang et al.
a constantly illuminated (120 lx) for 5 min on 1 st day. On the second
day, after adapting for 180 s in the box, to three to five circulation
training. Animals received auditory stimulation (30s, 5 kHz, 70 dB),
then the electric current stimulation would be given (0.65 mA, 1s). The
interval between each training was 30–60 s. Animals remained in the
cage for 30 s and were then returned to their home cage. Twenty four
hours later the contextual fear conditioning test was conducted.
Animals were placed into the same training cage, with no sound or
electric current stimulation, and their freezing behavior was recorded
during that 300 s. On the fourth day, cued fear conditioning began, the
background and smell of the boxes were all changed, after adapting
180 s in the box, only the auditory stimulation was presented (5 kHz,
70 dB), and then recorded their freezing behavior during the 300 s. The
fear-conditioning box was thoroughly cleaned with 70% ethanol before
the placement of each animal [24–26].
2.9. Statistics
All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS statistic 16.0,
using parametric Independent-Samples T Test. Significance was set at
p < 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Anxiolytic-like behavior
To explore the anxiety behavior of the gerbils, we compared them
with rats using two tests including open field test (OPF) and elevated
plus maze (EPM). In OPF, the gerbils exhibited higher exploratory ac-
tivity, which was indicated by an increasing time spent in the central
area (p < 0.01; Fig. 1A) and longer distance traveled (p < 0.001;
Fig. 1B) compared to the rats. Meanwhile, the traveling velocity of the
gerbils was higher compared with the rats (p < 0.001; Fig. 1C).
The data in the elevated plus maze (EPM) test implies that com-
pared to the rats, gerbils exhibited higher exploratory activity of the
open arm. The frequency of open arm entries (open arm entries/total
entries) of the gerbils is significantly higher than that of the rats
(p < 0.001; Fig. 1D). Similar results were obtained in total time on the
open arm (p < 0.01; Fig. 1E). Further, the frequency of closed arm
entries (closed arm entries/total entries) of the gerbils was significantly
lower than that of the rats (p < 0.001; Fig. 1F) as was the total time in
the closed arm (p < 0.01; Fig. 1G). The number of stretch-attend
postures of the gerbils was significantly higher than the rats (p < 0.01;
Fig. 1H).
3.2. Depression behavior test and motor co-ordination test
To investigate if the gerbil would display depressive-like behavior
we performed the Sucrose Preference Test (SPT). The results indicated
that there is no significant difference between gerbil and rat in sucrose
preference. The consumption of the sucrose by the gerbils is almost
31
Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34
equal with that by the rats (p > 0.05; Fig. 2A).
The grip strength test was taken to clarify if muscle tone and motor
co-ordination of the gerbil would differ from the rat. To our surprise,
compared to the rats, the gerbils showed far less grip strength
(p < 0.001; Fig. 2B).
3.3. Social behavior test
We used the social interaction (SI) test to analyze the social beha-
vior of the gerbil. The results demonstrated that compared to the rats,
gerbils exhibited higher exploratory activity. Both the time spent with
the stranger gerbil (p < 0.05; Fig. 3A) and the frequency of interaction
with stranger gerbil (p < 0.05; Fig. 3B) were significantly higher than
seen in rats.
3.4. Learning and retention behavior test
Learning and retention behavior test are very essential in cognitive
behavior evaluation. Consequently, we chose the Barnes maze test and
the fear conditioning test to distinguish the difference between the
gerbil and the rat. In the Barnes maze test, the gerbils exhibited no
significant difference on spatial memory compared to the rats in
duration (Fig. 4A), latency (Fig. 4B), and the frequency to reach the
goal hole during testing (Fig. 4C) (all p’s > 0.05). However, when we
analyzed the training data, we found different results. During the first
and third day of training gerbils exhibited no significant difference in
spatial memory compared to the rats in latency or the frequency to
reach the goal hole (p > 0.05). During the second day of training
gerbils exhibited longer latency to reach the goal hole (p < 0.05;
Fig. 4D) than that of the rats with no significant difference in the fre-
quency to reach the goal hole (p > 0.05; Fig. 4E). During the fourth
training day gerbils exhibited longer latency (p < 0.05; Fig. 4F) and
shorter frequency to reach the goal hole (p < 0.05; Fig. 4G). Averaging
the four days of training the gerbils exhibited longer latency (p < 0.05;
Fig. 4H) and shorter frequency to reach the goal hole (p < 0.05;
Fig. 4I). Meanwhile, the same data was shown in a histogram during all
four days of training where the gerbils exhibited longer latency
(p < 0.05; Fig. 4J) and shorter frequency to reach the goal hole
(p < 0.05; Fig. 4K). Furthermore, when in a 90-s space exploration
test, the gerbils exhibited no difference of the frequency of finding the
non-goal holes (p > 0.05) compared to the rats. The gerbils exhibited
no difference of the frequency of finding the non-goal holes compared
to the rats during the first, second, and third (p > 0.05) training day.
However, during the fourth training day the gerbils exhibited higher
frequency of finding the non-goal holes (p < 0.05; Fig. 4L) compared
to the rats. Averaging the frequency of finding non-goal holes across all
four days of training the gerbils exhibited no significant difference in
the frequency on finding the non-goal holes (p > 0.05; Fig. 4M)
compared to the rats. Meanwhile, the same data was shown in a his-
togram (p > 0.05; Fig. 4N). All these data suggest that gerbils have
higher exploratory activity.
Fig. 2. The figure illustrates the results obtained
from the sucrose preference test (SPT). (A) There
were no significant differences in sucrose consump-
tion between gerbils and rats. p > 0.05. MG,
Mongolian gerbil.The figure illustrates the results
obtained from the grip strength test that (B) the
gerbil displayed significantly lower grip strength
than that in the rats. ***p < 0.001. MG, Mongolian
gerbil.
S. Wang et al. Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34

Fig. 3. The results of social interaction test show that

(A) the time spending with stranger and (B) the
frequency interaction with stranger of the gerbils
were all significant higher than that in the rats.
*p < 0.05. MG, Mongolian gerbil.

Fig. 4. The results obtained from the Barnes maze suggested that (A) the cumulative duration to reach the goal hole after the escape box was removed during the Barnes maze, (B) the
latency to reach the goal hole during the Barnes maze, and (C) the frequency to reach the entry zone during the Barnes maze showed no significant difference between the gerbils and the
rats (p > 0.05). (D) During the second day of training, gerbils exhibited longer latency and (E) the frequency to reach the goal hole showed no significant difference between the gerbils
and the rats. (F) During the fourth day of training the gerbils exhibited longer latency and (G) the shorter frequency to reach the goal hole than that of the rats. (H) The average of all the
four days of training showed gerbils exhibited longer latency and (I) the shorter frequency to reach the goal hole than that of the rats. A histogram is also shown that the average of all four
days of training (J) the gerbils exhibited longer latency and (K) the shorter frequency to reach the goal hole than that of the rats. However, (L) during the fourth training day the gerbils
exhibited higher frequency of finding the non-goal holes compared to the rats. Averaged together all the four days of training (M and N) the gerbils exhibited no difference in the
frequency of finding the non-goal holes compared to the rats. The results in the Fear conditioning test showed that (O) decreased total time spent freezing during Contextual fear
conditioning, and (P) during the Cued fear conditioning in the gerbils compared to the rats. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. MG, Mongolian gerbil.

32
S. Wang et al.
In the fear conditioning test gerbils exhibited decreased freezing
behavior when compared to the rats. The time spent freezing in both
contextual fear conditioning (p < 0.001; Fig. 4O) and cued fear con-
ditioning (p < 0.01; Fig. 4P) was decreased dramatically in the gerbils
compared to the rats.
4. Discussion
The Mongolian gerbil has become a popular laboratory animal for
its unique biological characteristics compared to other animals.
Previous reports have shown that gerbils activity scores, clinging or
climbing behavior remain stable across its lifespan, although there were
changes in their latency to climb down from a pole and decreased
rearing with age [6]. Therefore, the gerbil has been useful in the as-
sessment of behavioral aging [27]. We designed our experiments to test
whether the behavior of the gerbil may be unique compared to the more
commonly used lab rat.
Of the 7 tests performed in present study only the sucrose preference
behavior failed to show a significant difference from behavior. To test
anxiety behavior we conducted OPF and EPM tests and the results in-
dicated that the gerbil exhibited more anxiety-like behavior than the rat
(Fig. 1). These two tests are most commonly used in evaluation of drugs
treating anxiety and the mechanism of anxiety [28]. The time spent in
the central certain area in the OPF and time spent in the open arm in
EPM was increased in the gerbil compared to the rat indicating that the
gerbil has higher baseline anxiety than the rat. These results suggest the
gerbil may be a sensitive model for use in the study of anxiety disorders.
The parameters we set for the EPM was larger than previous reports
[13,29,30] because it was also adapted to gerbils. Verty et al. [13,29]
designed and optimized a special plus-maze adapted for the gerbil. Rico
et al’ report [30] described different parameters of plus-maze could also
test gerbil exploration and those parameters were still smaller than
ours. We observed that gerbils could be tested in a plus-maze with rats
in a preliminary test. Thus, we set a comparable size of the plus-maze in
order to compared rats and gerbils. In EPM test, Verty found that the
higher light (from 5 lx to 500 lx) would reduce the exploration of ger-
bils and Rico observed increased open-arms activity and suggested it
was due to low light (35 lx). However, Bradely et al. [31] and Starkey
et al. [32] reported that gerbils showed increased open-arm exploration
under high light level. Heldt et al. [33] reported that male gerbils ex-
hibited open-arms activity even near to zero under 100 lx. All men-
tioned above are different with 350 lx in the present study. Thus, it
would be necessary to further investigate the effect of light influence on
the gerbil in EPM. Nevertheless, the current results of EPM in our ex-
periment are consistent with previous reports [13,34] with open arm
time (%) about 30% and close arm time (%) near 50%.
Learning and retention was examined by the performance of gerbils
and rats in the Barnes maze and fear conditioning. The data in Barnes
maze test indicates that there were significant differences in behavior
between gerbils and rats during training but no significant difference
were seen during testing. Fear conditioning results showed that freezing
during contextual and cued fear conditioning test was significantly
lower in the gerbil than in rat. These data indicate that the gerbil ex-
hibited less freezing behavior than the rat which may be due to in-
creased active exploratory behavior or differences in pain sensitivity.
Social interaction is used to evaluated drug effects or mechanisms of
autism or schizophrenia [35]. We examined gerbil social behavior using
a social interaction test. Interestingly, the gerbil showed more frequent
interaction with the familiar partner and the stranger compared to the
rat. This finding was particularly evident in increased interaction time
and frequency of interaction with the stranger organism.
We also checked the grip strength of gerbil to assess difference in
strength between gerbil and rat. It is out of our expectation that wild
animal would be more strength of limb than domestic animal because
of more running and jumping activity. To our surprise, the gerbil
shewed dramatically lower grip strength than the rat. The decreased
33
Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34
grip strength may be the due to the difference in body weight of the
gerbil compared with the rat. The method we used to test grip strength
would be influenced by the body weight. It may be necessary to assess
gripping as was done in other reports [36] to more effectively evaluate
the grip strength between different animal.
We designed a battery of behavioral tests to compare gerbils and
rats. There are some advantages and disadvantages in this procedure.
On the one hand, using the same group of animals in different tests
obviously promotes ethical aspects such as reducing the number of
animals used in the experiments. However, the exposure of animals to
multiple tests affects their behavior in the each of the subsequent tests.
So we carefully arranged the order of these tests and took appropriate
span to minimize the influence on multiple tests. In addition, the weight
and the volume of rats and gerbils are very different. When performing
the test, we always adjusted and set the parameters of the apparatus to
fit both gerbils and rats. Our results suggest that all selected tests have
been validated for gerbils except the Barnes Maze. It may be because
the traditional evaluation index in Barnes Maze for rats is not suitable
for the more active gerbil. Therefore, we referred to other reports
[37–39] to analyze gerbil behavior in the Barnes maze and obtained
satisfactory results. Many of our results in the present study agreed with
the findings reported in other studies [37–41]. These analyses indicate
that the selected tests are validated in gerbils and the results are com-
parable with previous reports.
5. Conclusion
In summary, the data from current experiments showed that the
gerbil exhibited higher social interaction, anxiety and exploratory ac-
tivity, but lower conditioned fear and grip strength compared with the
rat. All these results indicated that gerbil may be a sensitive and an
active animal to be used in behavioral tests and would be a valuable
tool for use in behavioral brain research.
Conflict of interest
None
Acknowledgments
This study was funded by Key Projects in the National
Science & Technology Pillar Program of China (Nos.2015BAI07B01;
2015BAI09B01), and the National Science Foundation of China (No.
31572341).
References
[1] I.W. Stuermer, K. Plotz, A. Leybold, O. Zinke, O. Kalberlah, R. Samjaa, H. Scheich,
Intraspecific allometric comparison of laboratory gerbils with Mongolian gerbils
trapped in the wild indicates domestication in meriones unguiculatus (Milne-
Edwards, 1867) (Rodentia: gerbillinae), Zool. Anz. 242 (2003) 249–266.
[2] X.Y. Du, X.D. Zhu, G. Dong, J. Lu, T.Y. Zhao, H.H. Ye, R.S. Li, J.Y. Bai, Z.W. Chen,
Characteristics of circle of willis variations in the Mongolian gerbil and a newly
established ischemia-prone gerbil group, ILAR 52 (2011) e1–e7.
[3] B.H. Chen, J.H. Park, J.H. Ahn, J.H. Cho, I.H. Kim, J.C. Lee, M.H. Won, C.H. Lee,
J.D. I.K.Hwang, I.J. Kim, J.H. Kang, B.N. Cho, Y.H. Shin, Y.L. Kim, S.M. Lee,
Pretreated quercetin protects gerbil hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons from
transient cerebral ischemic injury by increasing the expression of antioxidant en-
zymes, Neural. Regen. Res. 2 (2017) 220–227, http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1673-
5374.200805.
[4] F. Hirayama, S. Takagi, Y. Yokoyama, E. Lwao, Y. Ikeda, Establishment of gastric
helicobacter pylori infection in Mongolian gerbils, J. Gastroenterol. 9 (1996) 24–28.
[5] L.N. Liu, S.G. Ding, Y.Y. Shi, H.J. Zhang, J. Zhang, C. Zhang, Helicobacter pylori
with high thioredoxin-1 expression promotes stomach carcinogenesis in Mongolian
gerbils, Clin. Res. Hepatol. Gastroenterol. 40 (2016) 480–486, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.clinre.2015.11.001.
[6] M.L. Cheal, The gerbil: a unique model for research on aging, Exp. Aging Res. 12
(1986) 3–21.
[7] N. Fujisawa, Y. Maeda, Y. Yamamoto, N.L. Sato, S. Niimura, Newly established low
seizure susceptible and seizure-prone inbred strains of Mongolian gerbil, Exp. Anim.
52 (2003) 169–172.
S. Wang et al.
[8] M. Conchedda, F. Gabriele, G. Bortoletti, Development and sexual maturation of
echinococcus granulosus adult worms in the alternative definitive host, Mongolian
gerbil (meriones unguiculatus), Acta Trop. 97 (2006) 119–125.
[9] M. Watanabe, B.J. Lee, W. Kamitani, T. Kobayashi, H. Taniyama, K. Tomonaga,
K. Ikuta, Neurological diseases and viral dynamics in the brains of neonatally borna
disease virus-infected gerbils, Virology 282 (2001) 65–76.
[10] R.S. Cordeiro, W.R. Scarano, S.G. Campos, F.C. Aantos, P.S. Vilamaior, R.M. Goes,
S.R. Taboga, Androgen receptor in the Mongolian gerbil ventral prostate: evaluation
during different phases of postnatal development and following androgen blockage,
Micron 39 (2008) 1312–1324, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.micron.2008.02.008.
[11] B.F. Goncalves, S.G.P. de Campos, R.M. Goes, W.R. Scarano, S.R. Taboga,
P.S.L. Vilamaior, Dual action of high estradiol doses on MNU-induced prostate
neoplasms in a rodent model with high serum testosterone: protective effect and
emergence of unstable epithelial microenvironment, Prostate 77 (2017) 970–983,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pros.23353.
[12] T.L. Wallace-Boone, A.E. Newton, R.N. Wright, N.J. Lodge, J.F. Mcelroy, Behavioral
and pharmacological validation of the gerbil forced-swim test: effects of neurokinin-
1 receptor antagonists, NPPR 33 (2008) 1919–1928.
[13] G.B. Varty, C.A. Morgan, M.E. Cohen-Williams, V.L. Coffin, G.J. Carey, The gerbil
elevated plus-maze I: behavioral characterization and pharmacological validation,
NPPR 27 (2002) 357–370, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0893-133x(02)00312-3.
[14] Y.J. Lu, X.W. Cai, G.F. Zhang, Y. Huang, C.Z. Tang, B.C. Shan, S.Y. Cui, J.Q. Chen,
S.S. Qu, Z. Zhong, X.S. Lai, G.Z. Steiner, Long-term acupucture treatment has a
multi-targeting regulation on multiple brain regions in rats with Alzheimer's dis-
ease: a positron emission tomography study, Neural Regen. Res. 12 (2017)
1159–1165, http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.211197.
[15] D. Dardou, L. Reyrolle, C. Chassain, F. Durif, Chronic pramipexole treatment in-
duces compulsive behavior in rats with 6-OHDA lesions of the substantia nigra and
ventral tegmental area, Behav. Brain Res. 332 (2017) 327–336, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.bbr.2017.06.016.
[16] X.Y. Du, Z.W. Chen, W. LI, Y.Q. Tan, J. LU, X.D. Zhu, T.Y. Zhao, G. Dong, L. Zeng,
Development of novel microsatellite DNA markers by cross-amplification and
analysis of genetic variation in gerbils, J. Hered. 101 (2010) 710–716.
[17] Y.A. Khadrawy, A.M. Salem, K.A. El-Shamy, E.K. Ahmed, N.N. Fadl, E.N. Hosny,
Neuroprotective and therapeutic effect of caffeine on the rat model of Parkinson's
disease induced by rotenone, J. Diet. Suppl. 14 (2017) 553–572, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/19390211.2016.1275916.
[18] M. Zhang, Y. Liu, M. Zhao, W. Tang, X. Wang, Z. Dong, S. Yu, Depression and
anxiety behaviour in a rat model of chronic migraine, J. Headache Pain 18 (2017)
27, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10194-017-0736-z.
[19] S. Liu, T. Lia, H. Liu, X. Wang, S. Bo, Y. Xie, X. Bai, L. Wu, Z. Wang, D. Liu,
Resveratrol exerts antidepressant properties in the chronic unpredictable mild stress
model through the regulation of oxidative stress and mTOR pathway in the rat
hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, Behav. Brain Res. 302 (2016) 191–199, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.01.037.
[20] D. Dibattista, Voluntary lactose ingestion in gerbils, rats, mice, and golden ham-
sters, Physiolo. Behav. 52 (1992) 59–63, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0031-
9384(92)90433-3.
[21] J. Malik, M. Karan, R. Dogra, Ameliorating effect of celastrus paniculatus stan-
dardized extract and its fractions on 3-nitropropionic acid induced neuronal da-
mage in rats: possible antioxidant mechanism, Pharm. Biol. 55 (2017) 980–990,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13880209.
[22] H.F. Wu, P.S. Chen, Y.T. Hsu, C.W. Lee, T.F. Wang, Y.J. Chen, H.C. Lin, D-
Cycloserine ameliorates autism-Like deficits by removing glua2-containing ampa
receptors in a valproic acid-induced rat model, Mol. Neurobiol. (2017), http://dx.
doi.org/10.1007/s12035-017-0685-1.
[23] G.J. Boersma, Y. Treesukosol, Z.A. Cordner, A. Kastelein, P. Choi, T.H. Moran,
K.L. Tamashiro, Exposure to activity-based anorexia impairs contextual learning in
weight-restored rats without affecting spatial learning, taste, anxiety, or dietary-fat
preference, Int. J. Eat. Disord. 49 (2016) 167–179, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.
22489.
[24] M.A. Rubin, D.B. Berlese, J.A. Stiegemeier, M.A. Volkweis, D.M. Oliveira, T.L. Dos-
Santos, A.C. Fenili, C.F. Mello, Intra-amygdala administration of polyamines mod-
ulates fear conditioning in rats, J. Neurosci. 24 (2004) 2328–2334.
[25] J. Chan, X. Guan, Y. Ni, L. Luo, L. Yang, P. Zhang, J. Zhang, Y. Chen, Dopamine D1-
34
Behavioural Brain Research 352 (2018) 28–34
like receptor in lateral habenula nucleus affects contextual fear memory and long-
term potentiation in hippocampal CA1 in rats, Behav. Brain Res. 321 (2017) 61–68,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2016.12.026.
[26] M.J. Girgenti, S. Ghosal, D. LoPresto, J.R. Taylor, R.S. Duman, Ketamine accelerates
fear extinction via mTORC1 signaling, Neurobiol. Dis. 100 (2017) 1–8, http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2016.12.026.
[27] E.L. Spangler, J. Hengemihle, G. Blank, D.L. Speer, S. Brzozowski, N. Patel,
D.K. Ingram, An assessment of behavioral aging in the Mongolian gerbil, Exp.
Gerontol. 32 (1997) 707–717.
[28] G.J. Boersma, Y. Treesukosol, Z.A. Cordner, A. Kastelein, P. Choi, T.H. Moran,
K.L. Tamashiro, Exposure to activity-based anorexia impairs contextual learning in
weight-restored rats without affecting spatial learning, taste, anxiety, or dietary-fat
preference, Int. J. Eat. Disord. 49 (2016) 167–179, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.
22489.
[29] G.B. Varty, M.E. Cohen-Williams, C.A.M. organ, U. Pylak, R.A. Duffy,
J.E. Lachowicz, G.J. Carey, V.L. Coffin, The gerbil elevated plus-maze II: anxiolytic-
like effects of selective neurokinin NK1 receptor antagonists,
Neuropsychopharmacology 27 (2002) 371–379, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0893-
133X(02)00313-5.
[30] J.L. Rico, M. Penagos-Gil, A.F. Castañeda, K. Corredor, Gerbils exhibit stable open-
arms exploration across repeated testing on the elevated plus-maze, Behav.
Processes 122 (2016) 104–109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.017.
[31] B.F. Bradley, N.J. Starkey, S.L. Brown, R.W. Lea, The effects of prolonged rose odor
inhalation in two animal models of anxiety, Physiol. Behav. 92 (2007) 931–938,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.06.023.
[32] N.J. Starkey, N.J. Bridges, The effects of acute, chronic and withdrawn progesterone
in male and female Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) in two tests of an-
xiety, Behav. Brain Res. 207 (2010) 490–499, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.
2009.10.039.
[33] S.A.1 Heldt, M. Davis, E. Ratti, M. Corsi, D. Trist, K.J. Ressler, Anxiolytic-like effects
of the neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist GR-205171 in the elevated plus maze and
contextual fear-potentiated startle model of anxiety in gerbils, Behav. Pharmacol.
20 (2009) 584–595, http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/fbp.0b013e32832ec594.
[34] N.J. Bridges, N.J. Starkey, Sex differences in Mongolian gerbils in four tests of
anxiety, Physiol. Behav. 83 (2004) 119–127, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.
2004.08.002.
[35] T.A. Paine, N. Swedlow, L. Swetschinski, Decreasing GABA function within the
medial prefrontal cortex or basolateral amygdala decreases sociability, Behav. Brain
Res. 317 (2017) 542–552, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.10.012.
[36] J. Malik, M. Karan, R. Dogra, Ameliorating effect of celastrus paniculatus stan-
dardized extract and its fractions on 3-nitropropionic acid induced neuronal da-
mage in rats: possible antioxidant mechanism, Pharm. Biol. 55 (2017) 980–990,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13880209.
[37] B. Janać, V. Selaković, L. Radenović, Temporal patterns of motor behavioural im-
provements by MK-801 in Mongolian gerbils submitted to different duration of
global cerebral ischemia, Behav. Brain Res. 194 (2008) 72–78, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.bbr.2008.06.031.
[38] S. Rauš, V. Selaković, L. Radenović, Z. Prolić, B. Janać, Extremely low frequency
magnetic field induced changes in motor behaviour of gerbils submitted to global
cerebral ischemia, Behav. Brain Res. 228 (2012) 241–246, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.bbr.2011.10.046.
[39] S. Li, T. Kuroiwa, N. Katsumata, S. Ishibashi, L.Y. Sun, S. Endo, K. Ohno, Transient
versus prolonged hyperlocomotion following lateral fluid percussion injury in
mongolian gerbils, J. Neurosci. Res. 83 (2006) 292–300, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1002/jnr.20720.
[40] C. Sallaberry, A.P. Ardais, A. Rocha, M.F. Borges, G.T. Fioreze, S. Mioranzza,
F. Nunes, N. Pagnussat, P.H.S. Botton, L.O. Porciúncula, Sex differences in the ef-
fects of pre- and postnatal caffeine exposure on behavior and synaptic proteins in
pubescent rats, Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry S0278–5846 (2017)
30242–30247, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.08.015.
[41] N. Wang, H. Ma, Z. Li, Y. Gao, X. Cao, Y. Jiang, Y. Zhou, S. Liu, Chronic un-
predictable stress exacerbates surgery-induced sickness behavior and neuroin-
flammatory responses via glucocorticoids secretion in adult rats, PLoS One 12
(2017) e0183077, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183077.