Jason P. Schlumbohm

Strain differences in three measures of ethanol intoxication in mice: the screen, dowel and grip strength tests

Mice from 8 to 21 inbred strains were tested for sensitivity to ethanol intoxication using a range of doses and three different measures: the screen test, the dowel test and a test of grip strength. Strains differed under nearly all conditions. For the dowel test, two dowel widths were employed, and mice were tested immediately or 30 min after ethanol. For the dowel and screen tests, low doses failed to affect some strains, and the highest doses failed to discriminate among mice, maximally affecting nearly all. For grip strength, a single ethanol dose was used, and mice of all strains were affected. Pharmacokinetic differences among strains were significant, but these could not account for strain differences in intoxication. For doses and test conditions in the middle range, there were only modest correlations among strain means within a test. In addition, genotypic correlations across tests were modest to quite low. These results suggest that different specific versions of a test reflect the influence of different genes, and that genetic influences on different tests were also distinct.

Progress in a replicated selection for elevated blood ethanol concentrations in HDID mice

Drinking in the dark (DID) is a limited access ethanol‐drinking phenotype in mice. High Drinking in the Dark (HDID‐1) mice have been bred for 27 selected generations (S27) for elevated blood ethanol concentrations (BECs) after a 4‐h period of access to 20% ethanol. A second replicate line (HDID‐2) was started later from the same founder population and is currently in S20. An initial report of response to selection in HDID‐1 was published after S11. This article reports genetic and behavioral characteristics of both lines in comparison with the HS controls. Heritability is low in both replicates (h2 = 0.09) but the lines have shown 4–5 fold increases in BEC since S0; 80% of HDID‐1 and 60% of HDID‐2 mice reach BECs greater than 1.0 mg/ml. Several hours after a DID test, HDID mice show mild signs of withdrawal. Although not considered during selection, intake of ethanol (g/kg) during the DID test increased by approximately 80% in HDID‐1 and 60% in HDID‐2. Common genetic influences were more important than environmental influences in determining the similarity between BEC and intake for HDID mice. Analysis of the partitioning of intake showed that 60% of intake is concentrated in the last 2 h of the 4 h session. However, this has not changed during selection. Hourly BECs during the DID test reach peak levels after 3 or 4 h of drinking. HDID mice do not differ from HS mice in their rate of elimination of an acute dose of alcohol.

Ethanol Sensitivity in High Drinking in the Dark Selectively Bred Mice

BACKGROUND Mouse lines are being selectively bred in replicate for high blood ethanol concentrations (BECs) achieved after a short period of ethanol (EtOH) drinking early in the circadian dark phase. High Drinking in the Dark-1 (HDID-1) mice were in selected generation S18, and the replicate HDID-2 line in generation S11. METHODS To determine other traits genetically correlated with high DID, we compared naïve animals from both lines with the unselected, segregating progenitor stock, HS/Npt. Differences between HDID-1 and HS would imply commonality of genetic influences on DID and these traits. RESULTS HDID-1 mice showed less basal activity, greater EtOH stimulated activity, and greater sensitivity to EtOH-induced foot slips than HS. They showed lesser sensitivity to acute EtOH hypothermia and longer duration loss of righting reflex than HS. HDID-1 and control HS lines did not differ in sensitivity on 2 measures of intoxication, the balance beam and the accelerating rotarod. None of the acute response results could be explained by differences in EtOH metabolism. HDID-2 differed from HS on some, but not all, of the above responses. CONCLUSIONS These results show that some EtOH responses share common genetic control with reaching high BECs after DID, a finding consistent with other data regarding genetic contributions to EtOH responses.

Ethanol Withdrawal-Associated Drinking and Drinking in the Dark: Common and Discrete Genetic Contributions

Ethanol Withdrawal-Associated Drinking and Drinking in the Dark: Common and Discrete Genetic Contributions Individual mice differ in the dose of ethanol they will ingest voluntarily when it is offered during limited access periods in the circadian dark, a phenotype called drinking in the dark (DID). Substantial genetic variation in DID has been reported across a few standard inbred mouse strains, and a line of High Drinking in the Dark (HDID) mice has been established through selective breeding on the blood ethanol concentration (BEC) they attain at the end of a drinking session. Here, we report ethanol DID data for 23 inbred mouse strains, including 11 not previously reported, corroborating the genetic contributions to this trait. We also report data on a different ethanol drinking trait, the increased intake seen after multiple cycles of chronic intermittent exposure to ethanol vapor (CIE). Drinking escalated significantly during ethanol withdrawal. However, HDID mice and their HS controls showed equivalent escalation during withdrawal, demonstrating that withdrawal-associated drinking escalation is not a clear genetic correlate of selection on DID. Across inbred strains, DID is substantially genetically correlated with previously-published twobottle ethanol preference drinking data assessed under conditions of continuous ethanol access. Although inbred strain data for withdrawalassociated drinking are not available, the current pattern of results suggests that withdrawal-associated drinking is genetically distinct from DID, while genetic contributions to DID and two-bottle preference drinking are substantially similar.

Nest building is a novel method for indexing severity of alcohol withdrawal in mice

Withdrawal after chronic ethanol (EtOH) affects body temperature, goal-directed behavior and motor function in mice and increases general central nervous system excitability. Nest-building tests have been used to assay these states but to this point have not been employed as measures of EtOH withdrawal severity. We first refined nest-scoring methods using a genetically heterogeneous stock of mice (HS/Npt). Mice were then made physically dependent following three days of chronic EtOH vapor inhalation to produce average blood EtOH concentrations (BECs) of 1.89 mg/mL. EtOH withdrawal affected the progression of nest building over time when mice were tested 2-4 days after removal from three days of chronic exposure to EtOH. In a separate group of mice, chronic EtOH vapor inhalation (BECs 1.84 mg/mL) suppressed nest building over days 1-2 but not days 2-3 of withdrawal. In a following experiment, EtOH withdrawal dose-dependently slowed recovery of nest building for up to 32 h. Finally, we determined that long-lasting nest-building deficits extend to mice undergoing withdrawal from a high dose (4 g/kg) of acute EtOH. Sex differences for nest building were absent following EtOH exposure. In mice naïve to EtOH treatments, male mice had lower pre-test body temperatures and increased nest scores across a two-day testing period compared to females. These results suggest that nest building can be used to assess chronic and acute EtOH withdrawal severity in mice.

High Drinking in the Dark (HDID) mice are sensitive to the effects of some clinically relevant drugs to reduce binge-like drinking

BACKGROUND There is a serious public health need for better understanding of alcohol use disorder disease mechanisms and for improved treatments. At this writing, only three drugs are approved by the Food and Drug Administration as medications to treat alcohol use disorders - disulfiram, naltrexone, and acamprosate. Binge drinking is a form of abusive alcohol drinking defined by the NIAAA as a drinking to blood alcohol levels (BALs)>0.08% during a period of approximately 2h. To model genetic risk for binge-like drinking, we have used selective breeding to create a unique animal model, High Drinking in the Dark (HDID) mice. Behavioral characterization of HDID mice has revealed that HDID mice exhibit behavioral impairment after drinking, withdrawal after a single binge-drinking session, and escalate their intake in response to induction of successive cycles of dependence. Notably, HDID mice do not exhibit altered tastant preference or alcohol clearance rates. We therefore asked whether drugs of known clinical relevance could modulate binge-like ethanol drinking in HDID mice, reasoning that this characterization of HDID responses should inform future use of this genetic animal model for screening and development of novel potential therapeutics. METHODS We tested the efficacy of acamprosate and naltrexone to reduce binge-like drinking in HDID mice. Additionally, we tested the GABAB receptor agonist, baclofen, based on recent pre-clinical and clinical studies demonstrating that it reduces alcohol drinking. We elected not to include disulfiram due to its more limited clinical usage. Mice were tested after acute doses of drugs in the limited-access Drinking in the Dark (DID) paradigm. RESULTS HDID mice were sensitive to the effects of acamprosate and baclofen, but not naltrexone. Both drugs reduced binge-like drinking. However, naltrexone failed to reduce drinking in HDID mice. Thus, HDID mice may represent a useful model for screening novel compounds.

Ethanol Drinking in Withdrawal Seizure-Prone and -Resistant Selected Mouse Lines

Withdrawal Seizure-Prone (WSP) and Withdrawal Seizure-Resistant (WSR) mouse lines were bidirectionally selectively bred, respectively, to have severe or mild ethanol withdrawal handling-induced convulsions (HICs) after cessation of 3 days of ethanol vapor inhalation. Murine genotypes with severe withdrawal have been found to show low ethanol consumption, and high consumers show low withdrawal. An early drinking study with WSP and WSR mice showed modest evidence consistent with this genetic correlation, but there were several limitations to that experiment. We therefore conducted a thorough assessment of two bottle ethanol preference drinking in both replicate pairs of WSP/WSR selected lines in mice of both sexes. Greater preference drinking of WSR-2 than WSP-2 female mice confirmed the earlier report. However, in the parallel set of selected lines, the WSP-1 mice drank more than the WSR-1s. Naive mice tested for preference for sucrose, saccharin and quinine did not differ markedly for any tastant. Finally, in a test of binge-like drinking, Drinking in the Dark (DID), WSP mice drank more than WSR mice and attained significantly higher (but still modest) blood ethanol concentrations. Tests of acute withdrawal after DID showed a mild, but significant elevation in handling-induced convulsions in the WSP line. These results provide further evidence that 2-bottle ethanol preference and DID are genetically distinguishable traits.

Fear conditioning in mouse lines genetically selected for binge-like ethanol drinking

The comorbidity of substance- and alcohol-use disorders (AUD) with other psychiatric conditions, especially those related to stress such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is well-established. Binge-like intoxication is thought to be a crucial stage in the development of the chronic relapsing nature of the addictions, and self-medication through binge-like drinking is commonly seen in PTSD patients. We have selectively bred two separate High Drinking in the Dark (HDID-1 and HDID-2) mouse lines to reach high blood ethanol concentrations (BECs) after a 4-h period of access to 20% ethanol starting shortly after the onset of circadian dark. As an initial step toward the eventual goal of employing binge-prone HDID mice to study PTSD-like behavior including alcohol binge drinking, we sought first to determine their ability to acquire conditioned fear. We asked whether these mice acquired, generalized, or extinguished conditioned freezing to a greater or lesser extent than unselected control HS/Npt mice. In two experiments, we trained groups of 16 adult male mice in a standard conditioned fear protocol. Mice were tested for context-elicited freezing, and then, in a novel context, for cue-induced freezing. After extinction tests, renewal of conditioned fear was tested in the original context. Mice of all three genotypes showed typical fear responding. Context paired with shock elicited freezing behavior in a control experiment, but cue unpaired with shock did not. These studies indicate that fear learning per se does not appear to be influenced by genes causing predisposition to binge drinking, suggesting distinct neural mechanisms. However, HDID mice are shown to be a suitable model for studying the role of conditioned fear specifically in binge-like drinking.

An alcohol withdrawal test battery measuring multiple behavioral symptoms in mice

Despite acceptance that risk for alcohol-use disorder (AUD) has a large genetic component, the identification of genes underlying various components of risk for AUD has been hampered in humans, in part by the heterogeneity of expression of the phenotype. One aspect of AUD is physical dependence. Alcohol withdrawal is a serious consequence of alcohol dependence with multiple symptoms, many of which are seen in multiple species, and can be experienced over a wide-ranging time course. In the present three studies, we developed a battery of withdrawal tests in mice, examining behavioral symptoms from multiple domains that could be measured over time. To permit eventual use of the battery in different strains of mice, we used male and female mice of a genetically heterogeneous stock developed from intercrossing eight inbred strains. Withdrawal symptoms were assessed using commonly used tests after administration of ethanol in vapor for 72 continuous hours. We found significant effects of ethanol withdrawal versus air-breathing controls on nearly all symptoms, spanning 4 days following ethanol vapor inhalation. Withdrawal produced hypothermia, greater neurohyperexcitability (seizures and tremor), anxiety-like behaviors using an apparatus (such as reduced transitions between light and dark compartments), anhedonia (reduced sucrose preference), Straub tail, backward walking, and reductions in activity; however, there were no changes in thermal pain sensitivity, hyper-reactivity to handling, or anxiety-like emergence behaviors in other apparatus. Using these data, we constructed a refined battery of withdrawal tests. Individual differences in severity of withdrawal among different tests were weakly correlated at best. This battery should be useful for identifying genetic influences on particular withdrawal behaviors, which should reflect the influences of different constellations of genes.

Erratum: Strain differences in three measures of ethanol intoxication in mice: The screen, dowel and grip strength tests (Genes, Brain and Behavior 2 (201-213))

The authors have detected errors in the reporting of strain mean correlations in the above article. The errors concern the correlations for the 15.8 mm dowel at T30 after 2.0 g/kg (column headed T30 15.8 (2.0)), the screen after 1.75 g/kg (column headed Screen (1.75)), and the rows headed Grip Diff (2.0) and Grip BEC. A corrected Table 2 is presented. No substantive changes in interpretation are necessary as none of the correlations changed to significant. Changes in the following places in the text are necessary: On p. 208, in the left column, the second line reports the correlation of the 1.75 and 2.25 g/kg doses of the screen test, and should read r1⁄4 0.22 rather than r1⁄4 0.38. On p. 209 in the left column, the paragraph beginning ‘Sensitivity across the screen and dowel. . .’ 10 lines down, the sentences beginning with, ‘The screen (at 2.25 g/kg. . .’ all the way to the end of the paragraph need to be replaced with the following sentences: ‘’The screen (at 2.25 g/kg ethanol) and grip strength tests (at 2.0 g/kg) produced opposite results (r1⁄4 0.78), but this correlation depended substantially on two strains (129 and BALB) highly insensitive on the screen and highly sensitive on the grip strength test. When the screen and grip strength tests were correlated at the same dose (2.0 g/kg), the correlation was much lower (r1⁄4 0.27). Comparing grip and dowel sensitivity (1.5 g/kg) revealed a modest correlation with T0 performance on the 15.8 mm dowel at 1.5 g/kg (r1⁄4 0.36), but a negative correlation with the 9.6 mm dowel at T30 (r1⁄4 0.47). The following text does not need to be changed, and is correct as stated. The text under Results, Grip Strength section (pp. 206–207) and Relationships among variables section (p. 207), Fig. 3, Table 3 (p. 209), the text under Reliability estimates section (p. 209), the text in the Discussion regarding strain ranks of BTBR and A (p. 210), and the text in the Discussion regarding the correlation of grip strength and wildness (p. 211). The authors would like to apologise for this error, and any inconvenience it has caused to readers.