, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 79–94 | Cite as

Mouse mutants studied by means of ethological methods

I. Ethogram
  • J. H. F. van Abeelen


In order to determine in how far some known genes will affect the behaviour of mice (Mus musculus L.) the author used the ethological method for drawing up an inventory of behavioral elements; this can be considered the phenotype to be investigated.

For this purpose the behaviour was broken down into those elements presented by a solitary male (situation I), by two males placed together (situation II), and by one male and one female together (situation III). The environmental factors for the mice were kepts as uniform as was possible. In the present article an outline is given of the methods used in analysing that behaviour; in a later article it will be shown to what ends these methods can be used.


Environmental Factor Present Article Mouse Mutant Behavioral Element Solitary Male 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armstrong, E. A. (1950). The nature and function of displacement activities. Symp. S.E.B.IV. Cambridge, Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, E. M. (1959). Time and motion study of prefihhting behavior in mice.Anat. Rec. 134: 532 (abstract).Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, S. A. (1958). Exploratory behaviour.Brit. J. Psych. 49: 289–310.Google Scholar
  4. Bastock, M., D. Morris &M. Moynhan (1953). Some comments on conflict and thwarting in animals.Behaviour 6: 66–84.Google Scholar
  5. Bauer, F. J. (1956). Genetic and experiential factors affecting social reactions in male mice.J. comp. physiol. Psych. 49: 359–364.Google Scholar
  6. Beeman, E. A. &W. C. Allee (1945). Some effects of thiamin on the winning of social contacts in mice.Physiol. Zool. 18: 195–221.Google Scholar
  7. Bevan, J. M., W. Bevan &B. F. Williams (1958). Spontaneous aggressiveness in young castrate C3H male mice treated with three dose levels of testosterone.Physiol. Zool. 31: 284–288.Google Scholar
  8. Broadhurst, P. L. (1961). analysis of maternal effects in the inheritance of behaviour.Anim. Behav. 9: 129–141.Google Scholar
  9. Bruell, J. H. (1962). Dominance and segregation in the inheritance of quantitative behavior in mice. In:E. L. Bliss, Roots of Behavior. New York, Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  10. Calhoun, J. B. (1956). A comparative study of the social behavior of two inbred strains of house mice.Eco. Monogr. 26: 81–103.Google Scholar
  11. Dieterlen, F. (1962). Geburt und Geburtshilfe bei der Stachelmaus (Acomys cahirinus).Z. f. Tierpsych. 19: 191–222.Google Scholar
  12. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1958). Das Verhalten der Nagetiere. In: Handbuch Zool. Bd. 8, Lief. 12, Berlin, W. de Gruyter & Co.Google Scholar
  13. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1962). Technik der vergleichende Verhaltensforschung. In: Handb. Zool. Bd. 8, Lief. 31. Berlin, W. de Gruyter & Co.Google Scholar
  14. Eisenberg, J. F. (1962). Studies on the behavior ofPeromyscus maniculatus gambelii andPeromyscus californicus parasiticus, Behaviour 19: 177–207.Google Scholar
  15. Fuller, J. L. &W. R. Thompson (1960). Behavior Genetics. New York, Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Geer, B. W. &M. M. Green (1962). Genotype, phenotype and mating behavior ofDrosophila melanogaster.Amer. Naturalist 96: 175–181.Google Scholar
  17. Hagemann, E. &G. Schmidt (1960). Ratte und Maus. W. de Gruyter & Co, Berlin.Google Scholar
  18. Hirsch, J. (1962). Individual differences in behavior and their genetic basis. In:E. L. Bliss, Roots of behavior. New York, Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  19. Lindzey, G., H. Winston &M. Manosevitz (1961). Social dominance in inbred mouse strains.Nature 191: 474–476.Google Scholar
  20. Lipkow, J. (1960). Die Begattung bei der weissen Maus.Z. f. Tierpsych. 17: 182–187.Google Scholar
  21. McClearn, G. E. (1959). The genetics of mouse behavior in novel situations.J. comp. physiol. Psych. 52: 62–67.Google Scholar
  22. McClearn, G. E. (1961). Genotype and mouse activity.J. comp. physiol. Psych. 54: 674–676.Google Scholar
  23. McGill, T. E. (1962). Sexual behaviour in three inbred strains of mice.Behaviour 19: 341–350.Google Scholar
  24. Morris, D. (1956). The function and causation of courtship ceremonies. Fond. Singer-Polignac, Paris, Masson et Cie.Google Scholar
  25. Rosen, J. (1961). Timidity and aggressive behavior of the rat.J. Hered. 52: 219–220.Google Scholar
  26. Thiessen, D. D. (1961). Mouse exploratory behavior and body weight.Psych. Rec. 11: 299–304.Google Scholar
  27. Tinbergen, N. (1940). Die Übersprungbewegung.Z. f. Tierpsych. 4: 1–40.Google Scholar
  28. Whalen, R. E. (1961). Strain differences in sexual behavior of the male rat.Behaviour 18: 199–204.Google Scholar
  29. Williams, E. &J. P. Scott (1954). The development of social behavior patterns in the mouse in relation to natural periods.Behaviour 6: 35–65.Google Scholar
  30. Williams, C. D., S. A. Zerof &R. M. Carr (1962). Exploratory behavior of the crosses of three strains of rats.J. comp. physiol. Psych. 55: 121–122.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff 1964

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. H. F. van Abeelen
    • 1
  1. 1.Genetics LaboratoryUniversity of NijmegenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations