Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T19:33:41.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An animal model of trait anxiety: Carioca high freezing rats as a model of generalized anxiety disorder

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2024

Antonio Pedro Mello Cruz
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Psychobiology and Behavioral Neuroscience, Institute of Psychology, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Federal District, Brazil
Vitor Castro-Gomes
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
J. Landeira-Fernandez*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: J. Landeira-Fernandez; Email: landeira@puc-rio.br
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite being one of the main components of anxiety and playing a pivotal role in how an individual perceives and copes with anxiogenic situations or responds to a given treatment, trait anxiety is paradoxically omitted in most animal models of anxiety. This is problematic and particularly more concerning in models that are used to screen drugs and other treatments for specific anxiety disorders and to investigate their neurobiological mechanisms. Our group has been engaged in the search for specific anxiety-related traits in animal models of anxiety. We developed two new lines of rats with strong phenotypic divergence for high (Carioca High-conditioned Freezing [CHF]) and low (Carioca Low-conditioned Freezing [CLF]) trait anxiety as expressed in the contextual fear conditioning paradigm. Here, we summarize key behavioral, pharmacological, physiological, and neurobiological differences in one these lines, the CHF rat line, relative to randomized-cross controls and discuss how far they represent a valid and reliable animal model of generalized anxiety disorder and so high trait anxiety.

Type
Review Paper
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Anxiety is characterized by uncomfortable feelings of apprehension, insecurity, and uncertainty, combined with very specific physiological, neural, and behavioral reactions that are typically triggered by the perception of potentially threatening situations in the environment. From an evolutionary perspective, human anxiety likely has its origins in similar defensive reactions that are shared with many other animals, particularly mammals (Blanchard et al., Reference Blanchard, Hynd, Minke, Minemoto and Blanchard2001; Graeff, Reference Graeff, Koob, Le Moal and Thompson2010; McNaughton & Corr, Reference McNaughton and Corr2022), which through evolution have become increasingly complex and sophisticated in their capacity to anticipate and successfully cope with various sources of threat to our physical and emotional well-being.

In some individuals and for many reasons that have been widely investigated, anxiety eventually loses its adaptive function and can become a disorder, although there is no precise cutoff point that delineates adaptive (“normal”) and non-adaptive (“pathological”) anxiety. In clinical terms, anxiety is considered a disorder when it becomes excessive, persistent, and uncontrollable or in cases where it occurs even when there is little or nothing in the environment to indicate a potential threat. Under these circumstances, anxiety takes on a pathological dimension and often requires specific treatment for its clinical management (Baxter et al., Reference Baxter, Scott, Vos and Whiteford2013; Öhman & Mineka, Reference Öhman and Mineka2001).

Pathological anxiety is not limited to a single homogeneous clinical condition; instead, it extends to several qualitatively distinct anxiety disorder categories that depend on their causes and symptoms. According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, Text Revision (DSM-5-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2022), the major anxiety disorders include separation anxiety disorder, selective mutism, specific phobia, social anxiety, panic disorder, agoraphobia, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), in addition to other anxiety disorders, such as substance/medication-induced anxiety disorder, anxiety disorder due to another medical condition, and other specified and unspecified anxiety disorders.

Among anxiety disorders, GAD is believed to be one of the most prevalent (Ruscio et al., Reference Ruscio, Hallion, Lim, Aguilar-Gaxiola, Al-Hamzawi, Alonso and Scott2017). Such disorder encompasses various signs and symptoms, the most evident of which is a diffuse, persistent, and exacerbated feeling of worry that is not restricted to a particular stimulus but rather involves various circumstances (Crocq, Reference Crocq2017). Worry is impossible to assess in animals, but muscle tension, irritability, fatigue, difficulty concentrating, sleep disturbances, restlessness, and combinations of these symptoms often coexist with this feeling of worry. According to the DSM-5, the feeling of worry must be accompanied by at least three of these symptoms on most days for at least 6 months to satisfy the criteria for GAD.

Anxiety has two forms: state anxiety and trait anxiety (Spielberger, Reference Spielberger1972). State anxiety is a transient state of anxiety that occurs at a given moment in a specific context. It is an emotional state of anxiety that is directly related to the perception of a potential threat, such that its intensity tends to increase in the presence of the threat and ceases when it is no longer present. Trait anxiety refers to an individual’s vulnerability to express anxiety over time in different situations, a relatively stable component of personality that involves an intricate interplay between genetic and environmental factors for its expression (Gottschalk & Domschke, Reference Gottschalk and Domschke2017). Importantly, individuals vary considerably in their anxious personality traits and coping styles (Knowles & Olatunji, Reference Knowles and Olatunji2020; Myles et al., Reference Myles, Grafton and MacLeod2020). Moreover, extreme variations in certain anxiety traits have been linked to specific anxiety disorders (Knowles & Olatunji, Reference Knowles and Olatunji2020), this link has received great clinical and research interest.

1. Animal models of trait anxiety

Anxiety-like behavior is not exclusive to humans. Many nonhuman animals also have biological mechanisms that enable them to anticipate and successfully cope with various threat-related stimuli in the environment. Except for phenomenological and highly subjective aspects that are inherent to reports of human anxiety, almost all other anxiety-related components show great similarity across mammalian species and have long been used to study anxiety in laboratory settings (for review, see Graeff, Reference Graeff, Koob, Le Moal and Thompson2010; Steimer, Reference Steimer2011). Since the seminal work of Hall (Reference Hall1934) that showed that rats with high and low levels of emotionality exhibit different patterns of exploration in an open field (i.e., more emotionality, less exploration), no other emotion has been more studied in animal models than anxiety and its related disorders.

Dozens of animal models of elicited anxiety have been validated, and many have been recognized as valuable or indispensable tools for studying defensive behaviors and searching for more effective and targeted treatments for specific anxiety disorders (Steimer, Reference Steimer2011). However, despite its obvious clinical important, trait anxiety is paradoxically omitted or rarely addressed in most of these studies. This is particularly concerning when attempting to model or simulate anxiety in anxiolytic screening studies and when investigating neurobiological mechanisms that underlie defensive behaviors and their possible associations with anxiety disorders. One reason omission of a trait perspective is problematic is that behavioral tests of anxiety in humans and animals always involve an interplay between a trait anxiety component (which reflects an individual’s vulnerability or susceptibility to anxiety) and the situation that elicits state anxiety at the time of testing. Thus, when extreme forms of these traits are ignored, it is difficult, if not impossible, to dissociate adaptive defensive reactions from eventual maladaptive defensive reactions that are supposedly associated with specific anxiety disorders. Moreover, trait anxiety is not directly observable. Instead, it is inferred as a tendency to anxiety that can only be phenotypically observed and assessed through a standardized anxiety-related measure (e.g., behavioral, physiological, and neural correlates) at the time of testing. Finally, interactions between trait and state anxiety have been found to influence both the direction and magnitude of a given treatment (Griebel et al., Reference Griebel, Belzung, Perrault and Sanger2000; Rao & Sadananda, Reference Rao and Sadananda2016).

One strategy to manipulate trait anxiety in animal models is bidirectional selective breeding for extremes in anxiety-related parameters (for review, see Steimer & Driscoll, Reference Steimer and Driscoll2003), such as high anxiety-related behavior (HAB) and low anxiety-related behavior (LAB) rats and mice (Carboni et al., Reference Carboni, Khoury, Beiderbeck, Neumann and Mathé2022; Landgraf & Wigger, Reference Landgraf and Wigger2003; Liebsch et al., Reference Liebsch, Montkowski, Holsboer and Landgraf1998), Roman high- and low-avoidance rats (Bignami, Reference Bignami1965; Giorgi et al., Reference Giorgi, Corda and Fernández-Teruel2019), Naples high- and low-excitability rats (Sadile et al., Reference Sadile, Cerbone, Lamberti and Cioffi1984; Pellicano & Sadile, Reference Pellicano and Sadile2006), the Syracuse (high- and low-avoidance) rat strains (Brush, Reference Brush2003; Brush et al., Reference Brush, Gendron and Isaacson1999), the Maudsley reactive and non-reactive strains (selected for emotional defecation; Broadhurst, Reference Broadhurst and Eysenck1960, Reference Broadhurst1975), the Tsukuba (high and low runway activity) rat strains (Blizard et al., Reference Blizard, Wada, Onuki, Kato, Mori and Makino2005; Fujii et al., Reference Fujii, Asada, Takata, Yamano and Imada1989; who also differ on defecation), Floripa H and L rat lines (Izídio, & Ramos, Reference Izídio and Ramos2007; Ramos et al., Reference Ramos, Correia, Izídio and Brüske2003), aggressive and non-aggressive mice (Benus et al., Reference Benus, Bohus, Koolhaas and van Oortmerssen1991; Miczek et al., Reference Miczek, Takahashi, Gobrogge, Hwa and de Almeida2015), and Carioca High-conditioned Freezing (CHF) and Carioca Low-conditioned Freezing (CLF) rats. The latter were developed by our group and associated laboratories, whose data and foundations as an animal model of GAD are discussed below.

2. CHF rat line as a model of GAD

Starting with a highly heterogeneous population of Wistar rats, our groups used a selective breeding protocol that has been in progress for the last two decades, to develop two new lines of rats. The lines differ in strong phenotypic divergence for high (CHF) and low (CLF) trait anxiety, respectively, with selection based on conditioned freezing scores in the well-known contextual fear conditioning paradigm (Bolles & Fanselow, Reference Bolles and Fanselow1982). The basic contextual fear conditioning protocol for our breeding separation involves two phases, trial and test sessions, that occur on two consecutive days. On the first day (conditioning trial), the rats are placed in a conditioning chamber. After 8 min (pre-shock period/baseline), they are exposed to three unavoidable mild electric footshocks. Twenty-four hours later, the rats are placed in the same conditioning chamber (context), but no shock is delivered. In this second exposure (test session), a trained observer records the occurrence of freezing behavior for 8 min according to a time-sampling schedule. Rats were scored every 2 s as either freezing or not freezing. Freezing was defined as a crouching, immobile posture with no movement other than that required for breathing. Contextual freezing behavior is then converted to a percentage as an anxiety-like measure. The breeding protocol, which we have uninterruptedly conducted in 42 successive generations since 2006, consists of the selective mating of male and female rats with their respective highest and lowest percentages of contextual freezing behavior. To better interpret differences between these two rat lines, a group of Wistar rats (CTL), composed of the offspring of randomized cross-breeding populations, is used as an additional control group in most of our studies. All animals were phenotyped at 2–3 months of age.

Over the past 16 years, more than 13 000 animals have already been phenotypically selected based on this protocol. Figure 1 presents the conditioned freezing behavior of our breeding lines across the 42 generations. As we reported in our first study (Castro-Gomes & Landeira-Fernandez, Reference Castro-Gomes and Landeira-Fernandez2008), CHF and CLF rats exhibited reliable differences in conditioned freezing after the first three generations of selection. Males from both lines consistently exhibit more conditioned freezing in response to contextual cues than females. We also noted that the shock parameters that we employed (i.e., three 1 mA, 1 s unsignaled electrical footshocks with an inter-shock interval of 20 s) were very high. After the fourth generation, the shock intensity was reduced until it reached 0·4 mA in the 12th generation. In the 13th and 14th generations, we increased the shock intensity to 0·5 mA and 0·6 mA, respectively. This shock intensity has remained until the present generation. Male and female CHF, CLF, and CTL animals systematically exhibit clear differences across the remained generations.

Figure 1. Mean ± SEM percentage of the time spent freezing in male (top) and female (bottom) Carioca High Freezing (CHF) and Carioca Low Freezing (CLF) rats across 42 generations. Control animals (CTL) started in the fifth generation of the two breeding lines.

The CHF rat line has been identified as a valid and reliable animal model of GAD. We present a brief summary of how the main behavioral, pharmacological, physiological, and neurobiological findings from these animals constitute an animal model of GAD. Notably, no animal model of anxiety fully recapitulates all aspects of clinical anxiety in humans. Importantly, however, this is not the intention of such models. Typically, the validity of an animal model of anxiety or some other psychiatric condition is estimated by considering its degree of face validity, predictive validity, and construct validity (Treit, Reference Treit1985; Willner, Reference Willner1984), although there is often certain parsimony with regard to the need to fully meet these three criteria, depending on the purpose of the study.

Table 1 summarizes the major correspondence between findings from the CHF rat line and some of the main features of GAD in humans. One of the first behavioral findings from the CHF line was that these animals expressed their corresponding “anxious” characteristics not only in the contextual fear conditioning paradigm but also in the elevated plus maze (Cavaliere et al., Reference Cavaliere, Maisonnette, Krahe, Landeira-Fernandez and Cruz2020; Dias et al., Reference Dias, Bevilaqua, Silveira, Landeira-Fernandez and Gardino2009; Léon et al., Reference Léon, Castro-Gomes, Zárate-Guerrero, Corredor, Cruz, Brandão, Cardenas and Landeira-Fernandez2017; Salviano et al., Reference Salviano, Ferreira, Greidinger, Couto, Landeira-Fernandez and Cruz2014), one of the best-known animal models of anxiety (Cruz et al., Reference Cruz, Frei and Graeff1994; Handley & Mithani, Reference Handley and Mithani1984; Pellow et al., Reference Pellow, Chopin, File and Briley1985). The elevated plus maze is based on the naturally occurring approach-avoidance conflict in rodents that is related to their motivation to explore new environments and innate fear of heights and open spaces (Treit et al., Reference Treit, Menard and Royan1993). Importantly, this anxious behavioral profile that is observed in CHF rats in the elevated plus maze (i.e., decrease in open-arm exploration) was detected without significant changes in the total number of arm entries (open + closed arm entries) or absolute number of closed arm entries, thus indicating that the phenotyping protocol that is used for the selection of successive generations of these animals based on contextual fear conditioning does not produce significant general locomotor impairments, a key point in animal models of anxiety that require locomotor activity.

Table 1. Correspondence between CHF rat line findings and some main features of generalized anxiety disorder in humans

A substantial body of evidence (Brandão et al., Reference Brandão, Zanoveli, Ruiz-Martinez, Oliveira and Landeira-Fernandez2008; Fanselow, Reference Fanselow2000; Luyten et al., Reference Luyten, Vansteenwegen, van Kuyck, Gabriëls and Nuttin2011; Phillips & LeDoux, Reference Phillips and LeDoux1992) indicates that conditioned freezing behavior in response to a context but not to an explicit cue (e.g., a tone that is previously associated with an aversive stimulus) share several behavioral, physiological, and neurobiological characteristics with GAD. Likewise, the elevated plus maze, at least in its usual form of a single 5-min session, also exhibits features of an animal model of GAD. An intricate relationship has been suggested between a type of behavior that is supposedly related to generalized anxiety, which would occur during the first 5 min of a single exposure to the test, with another type of anxiety (specific phobia) that results from a longer exposure (10 min) or second 5-min exposure to the test (File & Zangrossi, Reference File and Zangrossi1993). This view is consistent with findings that anxiolytics increase open-arm exploration during a single 5-min session in the elevated plus maze but lose this anxiolytic-like effect (i.e., “one trial tolerance”) when given in a single 10-min session or second 5-min session (File & Zangrossi, Reference File and Zangrossi1993). According to these authors, this mimics a condition that is supposedly related to specific phobia, for which anxiolytics are known to be ineffective (Bandelow, Michaelis, & Wedekind, 2017). Therefore, high trait anxiety in CHF rats exposed for 5 min to the elevated plus maze further corroborates the proposition that these animals are a model of GAD.

Other more recent behavioral findings also corroborate this view. For example, one of the main characteristics of GAD is its chronic course. Accordingly, Lages et al. (Reference Lages, Maisonnette, Rosseti and Landeira-Fernandez2021a) showed that CLF rats were unable to consolidate aversive memories, whereas CHF rats exhibited considerable percentages of freezing behavior even after multiple exposures to the context that was previously associated with the aversive stimulus, with the additional interesting feature of being susceptible to extinction. In another study that compared patterns of freezing behavior in CHF and CLF rats in response to the context or cue (a tone that was previously associated with an electric footshock), Macêdo-Souza et al. (Reference Macêdo-Souza, Maisonnette, Filgueiras, Landeira-Fernandez and Krahe2020) showed that CHF rats froze more than CTL rats and these more than CLF when exposed to the context, that is associated to generalized anxiety disorder (Luyten et al., Reference Luyten, Vansteenwegen, van Kuyck, Gabriëls and Nuttin2011) but not to the cue that is supposed linked to specific phobia (Garcia, Reference Garcia2017; Grillon et al., Reference Grillon, Baas, Pine, Lissek, Lawley, Ellis and Levine2006).

Potentially threatening situations are also known to activate the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis (Hinds & Sanchez, Reference Hinds and Sanchez2022). Consequently, GAD patients have been found to have elevated cortisol levels (Lenze et al., Reference Lenze, Mantella, Shi, Goate, Nowotny, Butters, Andreescu, Thompson and Rollman2011). Again, CHF rats were equally selective for this parameter as reported by Mousovich-Neto et al. (Reference Mousovich-Neto, Lourenço, Landeira-Fernandez and Corrêa da Costa2015). These authors showed increased neuroendocrine responses (i.e., increased serum corticosterone) in CHF rats comparted to control animals.

Benzodiazepines are among the most commonly prescribed and effective medications for GAD (Gomez et al., Reference Gomez, Barthel and Hofmann2018). For this reason, many animal models of anxiety are pharmacologically validated based on this class of drugs. Thus, in one of our studies (Cavaliere et al., Reference Cavaliere, Maisonnette, Krahe, Landeira-Fernandez and Cruz2020), systemic injections of the benzodiazepine midazolam (0·25, 0·5, 0·75, and 1·0 mg/kg, i.p.) selectively increased open-arm exploration in CHF rats exposed for 5 min to the elevated plus maze test. Interestingly, however, this anxiolytic-like profile was only observed at the lowest dose tested (0·25 mg/kg) in CLF rats. This observation is consistent with previous findings that anxiolytic-like effects of benzodiazepines and mainly serotonergic anxiolytics appear to depend on the animals’ level of anxiety before testing (Blanchard et al., Reference Blanchard, Hynd, Minke, Minemoto and Blanchard2001). Accordingly, in another study, systemic (0·5 mg/kg, i.p.) and intra-infralimbic cortex (5 nmol/ml) injections of the preferential 5-HT2A receptor antagonist ketanserin induced anxiolytic-like effects in CHF rats but anxiogenic-like effects in CLF rats in the elevated plus maze (León et al., Reference Léon, Castro-Gomes, Zárate-Guerrero, Corredor, Cruz, Brandão, Cardenas and Landeira-Fernandez2017).

Another interesting finding that is also consistent with characteristics of GAD in humans refers to alcohol consumption. Alcohol is known for its “anxiolytic” properties in humans and animals. So, since GAD has also been associated with alcohol abuse in clinical and nonclinical populations (Kushner et al., Reference Kushner, Sher and Beitman1990; Smith & Randall, Reference Smith and Randall2012), this association was also recently investigated in the CHF rat line (Bezerra-Krounis et al., Reference Bezerra-Karounis, Krahe, Maisonnette and Landeira-Fernandez2020). As expected, CHF animals consumed more alcohol than CLF and control animals, which opens the possibility of using this model to better understand the comorbidity between GAD and alcohol abuse.

It is important to mention that anxiety and depression are independent disorders, although, clinical studies have shown that there is a high level of comorbidity between them (Groen et al., Reference Groen, Ryan, Wigman, Riese, Penninx, Giltay, Wichers and Hartman2020), with a co-occurrence rate of 90% (Gorman (Reference Gorman1996). Results from our breeding line indicated that CHF animals from the fourth generation did not differ from control animals, as measured by the forced swimming test (Dias et al., Reference Dias, Bevilaqua, Silveira, Landeira-Fernandez and Gardino2009). However, more recent results, employing CHF animal from the 26th and 27th generation indicated a depressive like behavior when compared to control animals (Goulart et al., Reference Goulart, Rocha-Mendonça, Maisonnette, Pandolfo, Landeira-Fernandez and Campello-Costa2021). Further studies may explore this type of relationship and whether antidepressant drugs are capable of reversing the depressive and the anxiety like effects in these animals.

At the other extreme from animals with high trait levels, CLF animals exhibited a delayed response to haloperidol at lower doses, needing higher doses to reach similar levels of catatonia as control randomly bred animals. Moreover, methylphenidate increased freezing response and motor activity among CLF rats when compared to control animals (Lages et al., Reference Lages, Maisonnette, Rosseti, Galvão and Landeira-Fernandez2021b). Since haloperidol and methylphenidate are dopamine-related molecular targets, it is possible that the CLF line of rats might represent an animal model of hyperactivity and attention disorders. This hypothesis is currently under investigation in our laboratory.

Finally, other studies developed by our group but not discussed in the scope of this review (for details, see Dias et al., Reference Dias, Bevilaqua, da Luz, Fleming, de Carvalho, Cocks and Gardino2014; Lages et al., Reference Lages, Balthazar, Krahe and Landeira-Fernandez2023; Léon et al., Reference León, Brandão, Cardenas, Parra, Krahe, Cruz and Landeira-Fernandez2020) also indicate functional and structural changes in neural circuits underlying anxiety in the CHF rat line, which seems to indicate that the phenotyping process that strengthened this trait anxiety was also expressed in terms of a great capacity for neural plasticity.

Acknowledgements

We thank our graduate students and other team colleagues who were and still are involved in the development and improvement of these rat breeding lines. The work was supported by CNPq (308482/2013-1) and FAPERJ (E-26/200.308/2023(281258).

Footnotes

This is part of the special issue on animal personality.

References

American Psychiatric Association (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fifth edition, text revision (DSM-5-TR). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
Baxter, A. J., Scott, K. M., Vos, T., & Whiteford, H. A. (2013). Global prevalence of anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-regression. Psychological Medicine, 43, 897910. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171200147X CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benus, R. F., Bohus, B., Koolhaas, J. M., & van Oortmerssen, G. A. (1991). Behavioural differences between artificially selected aggressive and non-aggressive mice: Response to apomorphine. Behavioural Brain Research, 43, 203208. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4328(05)80072-5 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bezerra-Karounis, M. A., Krahe, T. E., Maisonnette, S., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2020). Alcohol intake in Carioca High- and low-conditioned Freezing rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 197, 173019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2020.173019 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bignami, G. (1965). Selection for high rates and low rates of avoidance conditioning in the rat. Animal Behaviour, 13, 221227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(65)90038-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanchard, D. C., Hynd, A. L., Minke, K. A., Minemoto, T., & Blanchard, R. J. (2001). Human defensive behaviors to threat scenarios show parallels to fear- and anxiety-related defense patterns of non-human mammals. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 25, 761770. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00056-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blizard, D.A., Wada, Y., Onuki, Y., Kato, K., Mori, T., … Makino, J. (2005). Use of a standard strain for external calibration in behavioral phenotyping. Behavior Genetics, 35, 323332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-005-3224-1 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolles, R. C., & Fanselow, M. S. (1982). Endorphins and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 87101. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000511 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandão, M. L., Zanoveli, J. M., Ruiz-Martinez, R. C., Oliveira, L. C., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2008). Different patterns of freezing behavior organized in the periaqueductal gray of rats: Association with different types of anxiety. Behavioural Brain Research, 188, 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2007.10.018 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadhurst, P. L. (1960) Applications of biometrical genetics to the inheritance of behaviour. In Eysenck, H. J. (Eds.), Experiments in personality, Vol. 1 Psychogenetics and psychopharmacology (pp. 1102). London: Routledge Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Broadhurst, P. L. (1975) The Maudsley reactive and nonreactive strains of rats: A survey. Behavior Genetics, 5, 299319. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01073201 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brush, F. R., Gendron, C. M., & Isaacson, M. D. (1999). A selective genetic analysis of the Syracuse high- and low-avoidance (SHA/Bru and SLA/Bru) strains of rats (Rattus norvegicus). Behavioural Brain Research, 106, 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4328(99)00075-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brush, F. (2003). Selection for differences in avoidance learning: The Syracuse strains differ in anxiety, not learning ability. Behavior Genetics, 33, 677696. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026135231594 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro-Gomes, V., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2008). Amygdaloid lesions produced similar contextual fear conditioning disruption in the Carioca high- and low-conditioned freezing rats. Brain Research, 1233, 137145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2022.107602 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carboni, L., Khoury, A. E, Beiderbeck, D. I., Neumann, I. D., Mathé, A. A. (2022). Neuropeptide Y, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and neurokinin A in brain regions of HAB rats correlate with anxiety-like behaviours. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 57, 114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.12.011 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavaliere, D. R., Maisonnette, S., Krahe, T. E., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Cruz, A. P. M. (2020). High- and Low-conditioned Behavioral effects of midazolam in Carioca high- and low-conditioned freezing rats in an ethologically based test. Neuroscience Letters, 715, 134632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2019.134632 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crocq, M. A. (2017). The history of generalized anxiety disorder as a diagnostic category. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 19, 107116. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2017.19.2/macrocq CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruz, A. P. M., Frei, F., & Graeff, F. G. (1994). Ethopharmacological analysis of rat behavior on the elevated plus-maze. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 49, 171176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-3057(94)90472-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dias, G. P., Bevilaqua, M. C. N., Silveira, A. C.D., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Gardino, P. (2009). Behavioral profile and dorsal hippocampal cells in carioca high-conditioned freezing rats. Behavioural Brain Research, 205, 342348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2009.06.038 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dias, G. P., Bevilaqua, M. C., da Luz, A. C., Fleming, R. L., de Carvalho, L. A., Cocks, G., … Gardino, P. F. (2014). Hippocampal biomarkers of fear memory in an animal model of generalized anxiety disorder. Behavioural Brain Research, 263, 3445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2014.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanselow, M. S. (2000). Contextual fear, gestalt memories, and the hippocampus. Behavioural Brain Research, 110, 7381. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4328(99)00186-2 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
File, S. E., & Zangrossi, H., Jr. (1993). “One-trial tolerance” to the anxiolytic actions of benzodiazepines in the elevated plus-maze, or the development of a phobic state? Psychopharmacology, 110, 240244. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02246980 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fujii, M., Asada, M., Takata, N., Yamano, A., & Imada, H. (1989). Measurement of emotional reactivity and association ability of the Tsukuba emotional strains of rats (Rattus norvegicus) in licking and lever-pressing conditioned suppression situations. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 103, 100108. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.103.1.100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, R. (2017). Neurobiology of fear and specific phobias. Learning and Memory, 24, 462471. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.044115.116 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giorgi, O., Corda, M. G., & Fernández-Teruel, A. (2019). A genetic model of impulsivity, vulnerability to drug abuse and schizophrenia-relevant symptoms with translational potential: The Roman high- vs. low-avoidance rats. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 13, 145. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00145 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goulart, V. G., Rocha-Mendonça, H., Maisonnette, S., Pandolfo, P., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Campello-Costa, P. (2021). Differential expression of glutamatergic receptor subunits in the hippocampus in carioca high- and low-conditioned freezing rats. Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience, 116, 103666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcn.2021.103666 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomez, A. F., Barthel, A. L., & Hofmann, S. G. (2018). Comparing the efficacy of benzodiazepines and serotonergic anti-depressants for adults with generalized anxiety disorder: A meta-analytic review. Expert Opinion in Pharmacotherapy, 19, 883894. https://doi.org/10.1080/14656566.2018.1472767 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gorman, J. M. (1996). Comorbid depression and anxiety spectrum disorders. Depression and Anxiety, 4, 160168. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6394(1996)4:43.0.CO;2-J 3.0.CO;2-J>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottschalk, M. G., & Domschke, K. (2017). Genetics of generalized anxiety disorder and related traits. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 19, 159168. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2017.19.2/kdomschke CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graeff, F. G. (2010). Human fear and anxiety. In Koob, G., Le Moal, M., & Thompson, R. F. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of behavioral neuroscience (vol. 2, pp. 7075). Amsterdam: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griebel, G., Belzung, C., Perrault, G., & Sanger, D. J. (2000). Differences in anxiety-related behaviours and in sensitivity to diazepam in inbred and outbred strains of mice. Psychopharmacology, 148, 164170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002130050038 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grillon, C., Baas, J. M. P., Pine, D. S., Lissek, S., Lawley, M., Ellis, V., & Levine, J. (2006). The benzodiazepine alprazolam dissociates contextual fear from cued fear in humans as assessed by fear-potentiated startle. Biological Psychiatry, 60, 760766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.11.02 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Groen, R. N., Ryan, O., Wigman, J. T. W., Riese, H., Penninx, B. W. J. H., Giltay, E. J., Wichers, M., & Hartman, C. A. (2020). Comorbidity between depression and anxiety: Assessing the role of bridge mental states in dynamic psychological networks. BMC Medicine, 18, 308. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01738-z CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handley, S. L., & Mithani, S. (1984). Effects of α-adrenoreceptor agonists and antagonists in a maze-exploration model of “fear”-motivated behaviour. Naunyn-Schmeideberg’s Archives of Pharmacology, 327, 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00504983 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, C. S. (1934). Emotional behavior in the rat: I. Defecation and urination as measures of individual differences in emotionality. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 18, 385403. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0071444 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinds, J. A., & Sanchez, E. R. (2022). The role of the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis in test-induced anxiety: Assessments, physiological responses, and molecular details. Stresses, 2, 146155. https://doi.org/10.3390/stresses2010011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izídio, G. S., & Ramos, A. (2007). Positive association between ethanol consumption and anxiety-related behaviors in two selected rat lines. Alcohol, 41, 517524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcohol.2007.07.008 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knowles, K. A., & Olatunji, B. O. (2020). Specificity of trait anxiety in anxiety and depression: Meta-analysis of the State-Trait anxiety inventory. Clinical Psychology Review, 82, 101928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101928 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kushner, M. G., Sher, K. J., & Beitman, B. D. (1990). The relation between alcohol problems and the anxiety disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 685695. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.147.6.685 Google ScholarPubMed
Lages, Y. V., Maisonnette, S. S., Rosseti, F. P., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2021a). Acquisition and extinction of contextual fear conditioning in Carioca high- and low-conditioned freezing rats. Learning and Motivation, 75, 101744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2021.101744 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lages, Y. V., Maisonnette, S. S., Rosseti, F. P., Galvão, B. O., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2021b). Haloperidol and methylphenidate alter motor behavior and responses to conditioned fear of Carioca Low-conditioned Freezing rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 211, 173296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbb.2021.173296 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lages, Y. V., Balthazar, L., Krahe, T. E., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2023). Pharmacological and physiological correlates of the bidirectional fear phenotype of the Carioca rats and other bidirectionally selected lines. Current Neuropharmacology, 21. https://doi.org/10.2174/1570159X20666221012121534 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landgraf, R., & Wigger, A. (2003) Born to be anxious: Neuroendocrine and genetic correlates of trait anxiety in HAB rats. Stress, 6, 111119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1025389031000104193 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lenze, E. J., Mantella, R. C., Shi, P., Goate, A. M., Nowotny, P., Butters, M. A., Andreescu, C., Thompson, P. A., & Rollman, B. L. (2011). Elevated cortisol in older adults with generalized anxiety disorder is reduced by treatment: A placebo-controlled evaluation of escitalopram. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 19, 482490. https://doi.org/10.1097/JGP.0b013e3181ec806c CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
León, L. A., Brandão, M. L., Cardenas, F. P., Parra, D., Krahe, T. E., Cruz, A. P.M., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2020). Distinct patterns of brain Fos expression in Carioca high- and low-conditioned freezing rats. PLoS One, 15, e0236039. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236039 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Léon, L., Castro-Gomes, V., Zárate-Guerrero, S., Corredor, K., Cruz, A. P. M., Brandão, M. L., Cardenas, F. P., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2017). Behavioral effects of systemic, infralimbic and prelimbic injections of a Serotonin 5-HT2A Antagonist in Carioca High- and Low-Conditioned Freezing rats. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 113. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00117 Google Scholar
Liebsch, G., Montkowski, A., Holsboer, F., & Landgraf, R. (1998). Behavioural profiles of two Wistar rat lines selectively bred for high or low anxiety-related behaviour. Behavioural Brain Research, 94, 301310. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4328(97)00198-8 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luyten, L., Vansteenwegen, D., van Kuyck, K., Gabriëls, L., & Nuttin, B. (2011). Contextual conditioning in rats as an animal model for generalized anxiety disorder. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 11, 228244. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-011-0021-6 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macêdo-Souza, C, Maisonnette, S. S., Filgueiras, C. C., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Krahe, T. E. (2020). Cued fear conditioning in Carioca High- and Low-Conditioned Freezing Rats. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 13, 285. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00285 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNaughton, N., & Corr, P. J. (2022). The non-human perspective on the neurobiology of temperament, personality, and psychopathology: What’s next? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 43, 255262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miczek, K. A., Takahashi, A., Gobrogge, K. L., Hwa, L. S., & de Almeida, R. M. (2015). Escalated aggression in animal models: Shedding new light on mesocorticolimbic circuits. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 9095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.02.007 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mousovich-Neto, F., Lourenço, A. L., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Corrêa da Costa, V. M. (2015). Endocrine and metabolic function in male Carioca High-conditioned Freezing rats. Physiology and Behavior, 142, 9096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.01.028 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myles, O., Grafton, B., & MacLeod, C. (2020). Anxiety & inhibition: Dissociating the involvement of state and trait anxiety in inhibitory control deficits observed on the anti-saccade task. Cognition and Emotion, 34, 17461752. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2020.1802229 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Öhman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108, 483522. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.108.3.483 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellicano, M. P., & Sadile, A. G. (2006). Differential alcohol drinking behaviour and dependence in the Naples low- and high-excitability rat lines. Behavioural Brain Research, 171, 199206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2006.03.041 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellow, S., Chopin, P., File, S. E., & Briley, M. (1985). Validation of open: Closed arm entries in an elevated plus-maze as a measure of anxiety in the rat. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 14, 149167. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0270(85)90031-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R. G., & LeDoux, J. E. (1992). Differential contribution of amygdala and hippocampus to cued and contextual fear conditioning. Behavioral Neuroscience, 106, 274285. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.106.2.274 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramos, A., Correia, E. C., Izídio, G. S., & Brüske, G. R. (2003). Genetic selection of two new rat lines displaying different levels of anxiety-related behaviors. Behavior Genetics, 33, 657668. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026131130686 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rao, R. M., & Sadananda, M. (2016). Influence of state and/or trait anxieties of Wistar rats in an anxiety paradigm. Annals of Neurosciences, 23, 4450. https://doi.org/10.1159/000443555 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinhold, J. A., Mandos, L. A., Rickels, K., & Lohoff, F. W. (2011). Pharmacological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 12, 24572467. https://doi.org/10.1517/14656566.2011.618496 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruscio, A. M., Hallion, L. S., Lim, C. C. W., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., Al-Hamzawi, A., Alonso, J., …. Scott, K. M. (2017). Cross-sectional comparison of the epidemiology of DSM-5 generalized anxiety disorder across the globe. JAMA Psychiatry, 74, 465475. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.0056 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadile, A., Cerbone, A., Lamberti, C., & Cioffi, L. A. (1984). The Naples High (NHE) and Low Excitable (NLE) rat strains: A progressive report. Behavioural Brain Research, 12, 228229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4328(84)90106-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salviano, M., Ferreira, G., Greidinger, M., Couto, K., Landeira-Fernandez, J., & Cruz, A. P. M. (2014). Behavioral evaluation of male and female Carioca High and Low-Freezing rats. Trends in Psychology, 22, 663675. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2014.3-11 Google Scholar
Smith, J. P., & Randall, C. L. (2012). Anxiety and alcohol use disorders: Comorbidity and treatment considerations. Alcohol Research, 34, 414431.Google ScholarPubMed
Spielberger, C. D. (1972). Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research: I. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steimer, T. (2011). Animal models of anxiety disorders in rats and mice: Some conceptual issues. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 13, 495506. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2011.13.4/tsteimer CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steimer, T., & Driscoll, P. (2003). Divergent stress responses and coping styles in psychogenetically selected Roman High-(RHA) and Low-(RLA) Avoidance rats: Behavioural, neuroendocrine and developmental aspects. Stress, 6, 87100. https://doi.org/10.1080/1025389031000111320 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treit, D. (1985). Animal models for the study of anti-anxiety agents: A review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 9, 203222. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7634(85)90046-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treit, D., Menard, J., & Royan, C. (1993). Anxiogenic stimuli in the elevated plus-maze. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 44, 463469. https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-3057(93)90492-C CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willner, P. (1984). The validity of animal models of depression. Psychopharmacology, 83, 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00427414 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. Mean ± SEM percentage of the time spent freezing in male (top) and female (bottom) Carioca High Freezing (CHF) and Carioca Low Freezing (CLF) rats across 42 generations. Control animals (CTL) started in the fifth generation of the two breeding lines.

Figure 1

Table 1. Correspondence between CHF rat line findings and some main features of generalized anxiety disorder in humans