Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol
  • Published:

Housing, husbandry and handling of rodents for behavioral experiments

Nature Protocols volume 1, pages 936–946 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

Most animals used in research are rodents, mainly mice because of their predominance in genetics and molecular biology. This article attempts to provide an introduction to mice and rats: health considerations (of the experimenter); choice of species, age, strain and sex; housing and environmental enrichment; and animal identification, handling and dosing. These considerations apply to animal work in general; the rest of the article focuses on the preliminary aspects of behavioral testing, including a protocol for an open field test. This procedure is traditionally associated with activity measurements, and although automated versions are readily available these days, the latter are expensive and may be unavailable in many non-behavioral departments. Moreover, particularly when testing novel genetically modified animals or pharmacological agents, there is no substitute for direct visual observation to detect abnormal signs in the animals: for example, ptosis, piloerection, tremor, ataxia or exophthalmos. The open field test can be adapted in several ways: to assess general behavior and activity (similar to a primary screen in the pharmaceutical industry) or to measure memory (habituation) or anxiety.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Ear notching.
Figure 2: Coat marking.
Figure 3: Tail marking (temporary in mice).
Figure 4: An ear-tagged mouse.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Malakoff, D. The rise of the mouse, biomedicine's model mammal. Science 288, 248–253 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Crawley, J.N. What's Wrong with My Mouse? Behavioral Phenotyping of Transgenic and Knockout Mice (Wiley-Liss, New York, 2000).

  3. Whishaw, I.Q. & Kolb, B., eds. The Behavior of the Laboratory Rat: A Handbook with Tests (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2005).

  4. Saghal, A., ed. Behavioral Neuroscience, a Practical Approach Vols. I & II. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1993).

  5. Deacon, R.M.J. & Rawlins, J.N.P. T-maze alternation in the rodent. Nat. Protocols 1, 7–12 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Special issue devoted to laboratory animal allergy. ILAR J. 42 (1), (2001).

  7. Betmouni, S., Deacon, R.M.J., Rawlins, J.N.P. & Perry, V.H. Behavioral consequences of prion disease targeted to the hippocampus in a mouse model of scrapie. Psychobiology 27, 63–71 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jennings, M. et al. Refining rodent husbandry: the mouse. Report of the rodent refinement working party. Lab. Anim. 32, 233–259 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Van Loo, P.L.P. et al. Influence of cage enrichment on aggressive behavior and physiological parameters in male mice. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 76, 65–81 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. van Dellen, A., Blakemore, C., Deacon, R., York, D. & Hannan, A.J. Delaying the onset of Huntington's in mice. Nature 404, 721–722 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lockard, R.B. The albino rat: a defensible choice or a bad habit? Am. Psychol. 23, 734–742 (1968).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Festing, M.F.W. Warning: the use of genetically heterogeneous mice may seriously damage your research. Neurobiol. Aging 20, 237–244 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Olton, D.S. & Samuelson, R.J. Remembrance of places passed: spatial memory in rats. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 2, 97–116 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Aggleton, J.P. The ability of different strains of rats to acquire a visual nonmatching-to-sample task. Psychobiology 24, 44–48 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hyde, J. & Sawyer, T.F. Estrous cycle fluctuations in aggressiveness of house mice. Horm. Behav. 9, 290–295 (1977).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Guttman, R., Lieblich, I. & Gross, R. Behavioral correlates of estrous cycle stages in laboratory mice. Behav. Biol. 13, 127–132 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Farr, S.A. et al. Effect of ovarian steroids on footshock avoidance learning and retention in female mice. Physiol. Behav. 58, 715–723 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kristal, M., Axelrod, S. & Noonan, M. Learning in escape/avoidance tasks in female rats does not vary with reproductive condition. Physiol. Behav. 21, 251–256 (1978).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Contet, C., Rawlins, J.N.P. & Deacon, R.M.J. A comparison of 129S2/SvHsd and C57BL/6JOlaHsd mice on a test battery assessing sensorimotor, affective and cognitive behaviors: implications for the study of genetically modified mice. Behav. Brain Res. 124, 33–46 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Deacon, R.M.J., Bannerman, D.M., Kirby, B.P., Croucher, A. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Effects of cytotoxic hippocampal lesions in mice on a cognitive test battery. Behav. Brain Res. 133, 57–68 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Deacon, R.M.J., Croucher, A. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Hippocampal cytotoxic lesion effects on species-typical behaviors in mice. Behav. Brain Res. 132, 203–213 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Deacon, R.M.J. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Learning impairments of hippocampal lesioned mice in a paddling pool. Behav. Neurosci. 116, 472–478 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Deacon, R.M.J., Penny, C. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Effects of medial prefrontal cortex cytotoxic lesions in mice. Behav. Brain Res. 139, 139–155 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Deacon, R.M.J. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Hippocampal lesions, species-typical behaviors and anxiety in mice. Behav. Brain Res. 156, 241–249 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Guenther, K., Deacon, R.M.J., Perry, V.H. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Early behavioral changes in scrapie-affected mice and the influence of dapsone. Eur. J. Neurosci. 14, 401–409 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Deacon, R.M.J., Reisel, D., Perry, V.H. & Rawlins, J.N.P. Hippocampal scrapie infection impairs operant DRL performance in mice. Behav. Brain Res. 157, 99–105 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Davis, H. Prediction and preparation: Pavlovian implications of research animals discriminating among humans. ILAR J. 43, 19–26 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hall, C.S. Emotional behavior in the rat: I. Defecation and urination as measures of individual differences in emotionality. J. Comp. Psychol. 18, 385–403 (1934).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Walsh, R.N. & Cummins, R.A. The open field test: a critical review. Psychol. Bull. 83, 481–504 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Prut, L. & Belzung, C. The open field as a paradigm to measure the effects of drugs on anxiety-like behaviors: a review. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 463, 3–33 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. File, S.E. Behavioral detection of anxiolytic action. in Experimental Approaches to Anxiety and Depression (eds. Elliot, J.M., Heal, D. & Marsden, C.A.) 25–44 (Wiley, Chichester, UK, 1992).

  32. Barnett, S.A. The Rat: A Study in Behavior 2nd ed (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1975).

  33. Barnett, S.A. The Story of Rats: Their Impact on Us, and Our Impact on Them (Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW, Australia, 2001).

  34. Hart, M. Rats (Allison & Busby, London, 1982).

  35. Whishaw, I.Q., Metz, G.A., Kolb, B. & Pellis, S.M. Accelerated nervous system development contributes to behavioral efficiency in the laboratory mouse: a behavioral review and theoretical proposal. Dev. Psychobiol. 39, 151–170 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grant GR065438MA from the Wellcome Trust to the Oxford group.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3UD, UK

    Robert M J Deacon

Authors
  1. Robert M J Deacon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert M J Deacon.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deacon, R. Housing, husbandry and handling of rodents for behavioral experiments. Nat Protoc 1, 936–946 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2006.120

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2006.120

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing