Skip to main content
Log in

Phenotypic and genetic relations between initial response to electric shock and rate of avoidance learning in mice

  • Published:
Behavior Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The first experiment was designed to determine what proportion of the betweenstrain variation in rate of avoidance learning could be attributed to strain differences in sensitivity and response topography to electric shock. Measures of jumping at six shock intensities for four inbred strains were collected in a pretest of shock sensitivity. They were then used to derive a shock intensity for each strain which yielded the same amount of jumping for all strains. Avoidance training was administered to other mice of the same age and strains using the same apparatus and shock source as in the pretest. When training was given with a 180 μa shock, significant strain differences were observed in latency of the first escape and total errors to a learning criterion during both jump-out and one-way avoidance training. A large strain by training procedure interaction was found, as well. When training was administered with shock levels which yielded equal jumping in the pretest, strain differences in latency of the first escape were totally eliminated. However, the magnitude of strain differences in the rate of avoidance learning was not changed substantially. A second experiment examined two F1 hybrid strains and a four-way cross of the inbred strains tested in the first experiment. Results indicated that initial response to shock is characterized by intermediate inheritance, while rate of avoidance learning exhibits significant dominant inheritance. Although significant genetic differences in both initial response to shock and rate of avoidance learning were detected in the present experiments, it is concluded that the former cannot account for the latter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bolles, R. C. (1970). Species-specific defense reactions and avoidance learning.Psychol. Rev. 77: 32–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaventure, N., and Karli, P. (1961). Sensibilité visuelle spectrale chez des souris à rétine entièrement dépourue de cellules visuelles photoréceptrices.Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. 155: 2015–2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovet, D., Bovet-Nitti, F., and Oliverio, A. (1960). Effects of nicotine on avoidance conditioning of inbred strains of mice.Psychopharmacologia 10: 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovet, D., Bovet-Nitti, F., and Oliverio, A. (1969). Genetic aspects of learning and memory in mice.Science 163: 139–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carran, A. B. (1967). Passive avoidance and strain differences associated with differences in emotionality: A test of Mowrer's theory.Psychon. Sci. 7: 263–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carran, A. B., Yeudall, L. T., and Royce, J. R. (1964). Voltage level and skin resistance in avoidance conditioning in inbred strains of mice.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 58: 427–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, H. F., and Wolf, H. H. (1969). A pharmacological evaluation of a genetically predisposed conditioned avoidance response.Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med. 132: 1067–1071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. L. (1964) Inheritance of avoidance conditioning in mice: A diallel study.Science 143: 1188–1190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, N. C., Grossen, N. E., and Hunt, E. B. (1971). Apparent memory differences in ‘inbred’ mice produced by differential reaction to stress.J. Comp Physiol. Psychol. 74: 383–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, D. S. (1960).Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, Ronald Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. and Kenyon, J. (1966). Visual cliff behavior of mice as a function of genetic differences in eye characteristics.Psychon. Sci. 4: 35–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, J. L. (1966). Variation in effects of chlorpromazine in three strains of mice.Psychopharmacologia 8: 408–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hays, W. L. (1963).Statistics for Psychologists, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, K. R., and Schlesinger, K. (1967). Effects of the albino and dilute loci on mouse behavior.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 63: 320–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A. R. (1969). How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement? InEnvironment, Heredity, and Intelligence, Harvard Educ. Rev., Reprint Series No. 2, pp. 1–123.

  • Kimble, G. A. (1961).Hilgard and Marquis' Conditioning and Learning, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, J. A., and Mavromatis, A. (1956). The effect of a conflict situation on learning ability in two strains of mice.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 49: 465–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, I. M. (1954).Genetic Homestasis, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund, R. D. (1965). Uncrossed visual pathways of hooded and albino rats.Science 149: 1506–1507.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClearn, G. E. (1967). Genes, generality, and behavior. In Hirsch, J. (ed.),Behavior-Genetic Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowrer, O. H. (1947). On the dual nature of learning: A reinterpretation of “conditioning” and “problem solving”.Harvard Educ. Rev. 17: 102–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, T. G. (1970). Three biometrical genetic analyses of activity in the mouse.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 70: 37–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliverio, A. (1967). Effects of different conditioning schedules based on visual and acoustic conditioned stimulus on avoidance learning of two strains of mice.J. Psychol. 65: 131–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, L. E. (1967). Central, peripheral, and artifactual determinants of skin resistance in the mouse.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 64: 318–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A., and Parsons, P. A. (1970). Behavioural studies in different strains of mice and the problem of heterosis.Genetics 41: 65–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royce, J. R., and Covington, M. (1960). Genetic differences in the avoidance conditioning of mice.J. Comp Physiol. Psychol. 53: 197–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, K., and Wimer, R. (1967). Genotype and conditioned avoidance learning in the mouse.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 63: 139–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. P. (1970). On the generality of the laws of learning.Psychol. Rev. 77: 406–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theios, J., Lynch, A. D., and Lowe, W. J., Jr. (1966). Differential effects of shock intensity on one-way and shuttle avoidance conditioning.J. Exptl. Psychol. 72: 294–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, W. R. (1954). The inheritance and development of intelligence.Proc. Ass. Res. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 33: 209–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimer, R. E., Symington, L., Farmer, H., and Schwartzkroin, P. (1968). Differences in memory processes between inbred mouse strains C57BL/6J and DBA/2J.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 65: 126–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, H. H., Swinyard, E. A., and Clark, L. D. (1962). The differential effects of chlorpromazine and pentobarbitol on two forms of conditioned avoidance behavior inPeromyscus maniculatus gracilis.Psychopharmacologia 3: 438–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zerbolio, D. J., Jr. (1967). Differences between three inbred mouse strains on a wheel-turn avoidance task.Psychon. Sci. 7: 201–202.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This research was supported in part by Grant APA-398 from the National Research Council of Canada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wahlsten, D. Phenotypic and genetic relations between initial response to electric shock and rate of avoidance learning in mice. Behav Genet 2, 211–240 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065691

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01065691

Keywords

Navigation