Elsevier

Neurotoxicology and Teratology

Volume 13, Issue 6, November–December 1991, Pages 599-609
Neurotoxicology and Teratology

Article
Interlaboratory comparison of motor activity experiments: Implications for neurotoxicological assessments

https://doi.org/10.1016/0892-0362(91)90043-VGet rights and content

Abstract

Motor activity is an important functional measure used in neurotoxicology. The effects of chemicals on motor activity, however, may depend on variables such as type of measurement apparatus, physical and environmental testing conditions, and many other experimental protocol and organismic variables. Due to the increasing use of motor activity in neurotoxicology, a major question concerns the potential for differences in experimental findings due to variations in sensitivity and reliability between different laboratories and devices used to measure motor activity. This study examined historical data from a number of laboratories that employed different devices and experimental protocols to measure motor activity. Four aspects of the motor activity data were compared: 1) within-laboratory control variability across time; 2) within-laboratory replicability of control data; 3) between-laboratory variability in the effects of chemicals; and 4) between-laboratory comparison of the control rates of habituation. The analyses indicated that there was a relatively restricted range of within-laboratory variability and reliability in control values, and that these ranges were comparable across laboratories. Similar profiles of habituation were also seen across the different laboratories. Moreover, in virtually every case, all laboratories were capable of detecting qualitatively similar changes in motor activity following acute exposure to a variety of chemicals. These data indicate a high degree of comparability in the data generated by the different devices and experimental protocols.

References (65)

  • S. Norton

    Hyperactive behavior of rats after lesions of the globus pallidus

    Brain Res. Behav.

    (1976)
  • S. Norton et al.

    Development of nocturnal behavior in albino rats

    Behav. Biol.

    (1975)
  • K.-P. Ossenkopp et al.

    Motor activity changes and conditioned taste aversions induced by administration of scopolamine in rats: Role of the area postrema

    Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav.

    (1986)
  • P.H. Ruppert et al.

    Acute behavioral toxicity of carbaryl and propoxur in adult rats

    Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav.

    (1983)
  • U. Schaeppi

    Letter to the Editor: Comments on the number of experimental rats needed to test for motor activity

    Toxicology

    (1989)
  • P.J.K. Schreur et al.

    Two automated locomotor activity tests for dopamine autoreceptor agonists

    Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav.

    (1986)
  • H. Tilson

    Behavioral indices of neurotoxicity: What can be measured?

    Neurotoxicol. Teratol.

    (1987)
  • F. Vives et al.

    Effects of agonists and antagonists of cholinergic receptors on self-stimulation of the medial prefrontal cortex of the rat

    Gen. Pharmacol.

    (1986)
  • M.D. Aceto et al.

    Pharmacological studies with 7-benzyl-1-ethyl-1, 4-dihydro-4-oxo-1, 8-napththyridine- 3-carboxylic acid

    J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.

    (1967)
  • J. Buelke-Sam et al.

    Collaborative behavioral teratology study: Results

    Neurobehav. Toxicol. Teratol.

    (1985)
  • J.E. Casida et al.

    Mechanism of selective action of pyrethroid insecticides

    Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.

    (1985)
  • C.M.A.

    Comments on proposed test rule for glycol ethers by the Chemical Manufacturers Association

    Fed. Reg.

    (1987)
  • P.B. Dews

    The measurement of the influence of drugs on voluntary activity in mice

    Br. J. Pharmacol.

    (1953)
  • C.T. Dourish

    Effects of drugs on spontaneous activity

  • FASEB (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology)

    Predicting neurotoxicity and behavioral dysfunction from preclinical toxicological data

  • E.Z. Francis

    A developmental neurotoxicity study protocol developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

    Toxicologist

    (1990)
  • G.J. Gerber et al.

    Comparison of the behavioral effects of neurotoxic and systemically toxic agents: How discriminatory are behavioral tests of neurotoxicity?

    Neurobehav. Toxicol. Teratol.

    (1986)
  • M. Grant

    Cholinergic influences on habituation of exploratory activity in mice

    J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol.

    (1974)
  • W.J. Hunter et al.

    Intercomparison study of the determination of single administration toxicity in rats

    J. Ass. Off. Anal. Chem.

    (1979)
  • M. Krsiak et al.

    Uses and limitations of photocell activity cages for assessing effects of drugs

    Psychopharmacologia

    (1970)
  • R.C. MacPhail

    Observational batteries and motor activity

    Zbl. Bakt. Hyg. (B)

    (1985)
  • R.C. MacPhail et al.

    Motor activity and screening for neurotoxicity

    J. Am. Coll. Toxicol.

    (1989)
  • Cited by (91)

    • Variability of non-clinical behavioral CNS safety assessment: An intercompany comparison

      2019, Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods
      Citation Excerpt :

      Largest source of variability is therefore still considered the subjective way of scoring and probably the definition of parameters as well. Considerable interlaboratory variability has been described before (Crofton et al., 1991; Moser et al., 1997). In the latter study (Moser et al., 1997), interlaboratory reliability of FOB and motor activity was investigated following a collective observer training, albeit not all laboratories (N = 8) participated in this training; furthermore, not all observers that had been trained were later involved in the observations.

    • Regulatory Testing for Developmental Neurotoxicology

      2018, Comprehensive Toxicology: Third Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The research described in this article has been reviewed by the Health Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Agency nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

    3

    Present address: Neurotoxicology Division, Health Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.

    View full text