ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2019
The plus maze and scototaxis test are not valid behavioral assays for anxiety assessment in the South African clawed frog.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of SSRIs on unconditioned anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies.Psychopharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Fluoxetine exposure alters behavior and morphology ofmicroPublication biology · 2025Article
- Do body colour and sociability impact scototaxis response of fish?Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity and anxiety-like behavior during aging: A test of the glucocorticoid cascade hypothesis in amyloidogenic APPswe/PS1dE9 mice.General and comparative endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are no behavioral models for testing anxiety in amphibians, a group of animals widely used for developmental, ecotoxicological, and genetic research. We aimed to validate two common rodent paradigms, the plus maze and the scototaxis test, for use in the aquatic African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis). We predicted: (a) that frogs would prefer the dark, vs. light, portions of the testing arenas (face validity), (b) that this behavior could be altered with acute administration of anxio-selective drugs (construct validity), and (c) that time spent in the dark portions of the arenas would be positively correlated (predictive validity). Prior to testing, frogs were treated with fluoxetine (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor [SSRI]), desipramine (serotonin- and norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitor), caffeine (methylxanthine, adenosine receptor antagonist, phosphodiesterase inhibitor), saline, or were left unmanipulated. Each drug was administered acutely (1 h prior to testing; caffeine) or subacutely (24, 3, and 1 h prior to testing; fluoxetine, desipramine) at one of three doses. Plus maze and scototaxis testing were separated by 1 week; each frog completed both behavioral tasks and was treated with the same drug regimen prior to testing. Overall, both tests showed face validity, however, data suggest these paradigms lack both construct and predictive validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31144017What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.