Proces udomowienia (ulaboratoryjnienia) szczura wędrownego i jego implikacje dla badań naukowych

• Authors: Rafał Stryjek , Klaudia Modlińska

Title variants

EN

Domestication (laboratization) of the norway rat and its implications for scientific research

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

PL

Powszechne wykorzystanie w badaniach eksperymentalnych szczurów wędrownych (Rattus norvegicus), a co za tym idzie, niemal 200 lat, czyli setki pokoleń hodowli w sztucznych warunkach, doprowadziły do uzyskania niespotykanych w naturze odmian tego zwierzęcia. Obecnie szczepy laboratoryjne używane są w różnego typu eksperymentach m.in. z dziedziny medycyny, biologii, psychologii. Rosnąca liczba badań wskazuje na szereg różnic anatomicznych, morfologicznych i behawioralnych pomiędzy szczurem dzikim a jego laboratoryjnym odpowiednikiem. Nasuwają się zatem pytania o adekwatność stosowania szczurów laboratoryjnych w niektórych eksperymentach, możliwość generalizacji płynących z nich wniosków oraz o zasadność traktowania tych zwierząt jako modelu naturalnych form zachowania.
Udomowienie, a właściwie ulaboratoryjnienie szczura można traktować jako specyficzny i bardzo dynamiczny proces ewolucyjny. Fakt, że jesteśmy jego świadkami, obfitość dostępnych danych empirycznych oraz ogromny wpływ na losy nauki czyni ów proces szczególnie interesującym.

EN

The widespread use of Norway rats in experimental research, and therefore almost two hundred years and hundreds of generations of breeding in artificial conditions, have led to the forms (strains and breeds) of this species, that are unprecedented in nature. Currently, laboratory strains are used in various experiments i.a. in the field of medicine, biology, and psychology. A growing number of studies, however, points out a number of differences in anatomy, morphology and behavior between the wild rat and its laboratory counterpart. Thus, questions arise about (a) the relevance of the use of laboratory rats in some experiments, (b) the potentiality to generalize obtained results and (c) the justification for the use of these animals as models of natural forms of behavior.
Domestication (actually laboratization) of the rat can be regarded as a specific and highly dynamic evolutionary process. The fact that it can observed, abundance of available empirical data, and its huge impact on the science makes this process particularly interesting.

Keywords

PL

udomowienie; szczur wędrowny; szczur laboratoryjny; Rattus norvegicus

• Journal: Kosmos
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 65
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 177-186

Dates

published

2016

Contributors

author

Rafał Stryjek

• Instytut Psychologii PAN, Jaracza 1, 00-378 Warszawa, Polska
• Institute of Psychology PAS, Jaracza 1, 00-378 Warszawa, Poland

author

Klaudia Modlińska

• Instytut Psychologii PAN, Jaracza 1, 00-378 Warszawa, Polska
• Institute of Psychology PAS, Jaracza 1, 00-378 Warszawa, Poland

References

• Barnett S. A., 1958. Experiments on 'neophobia' in wild and laboratory rats. Brit. J. Psychol. 49, 195-201.
• Barnett S. A., 1963. A Study in Behaviour. Methuen & Co. Ltd.
• Barnett S. A., 2001. The story of rats. Their impact on us, and our impact on them. Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, Australia.
• Barnett S. A., Hocking W. E., 1981. Further experiments on the social interactions of domestic 'Norway' rats. Aggressive Behav. 7, 259-263.
• Barnett S. A., Dickson R. G., Hocking W. E., 1979. Genotype and environment in the social interactions of wild and domestic 'Norway' rats. Aggressive Behav. 5, 105-119.
• Beach F. A., 1950. The Snark was a Boojum. Am. Psychol. 5, 115-124.
• Benca R. M., Gilliland M. A., Obermeyer W. H., 1998. Effects of lighting conditions on sleep and wakefulness in albino Lewis and pigmented Brown Norway rats. Sleep 21, 451-60.
• Berdoy M., 2003. The laboratory rat: a natural history. Film dokumentalny.
• Blanchard D. C., Popova N. K., Plyusnina I. Z., 1994. Defensive reactions of 'wild-type' and 'domesticated' wild rats to approach and contact by a threat stimulus. Aggressive Behav. 20, 387-397.
• Boice R., 1966. The problem of domestication in the laboratory rat and a comparison of partially reinforced 'discriminatory' and anticipatory licking in domestic and wild strains of Rattus norvegicus. Michigan State University, Department of Psychology, USA.
• Boice R., 1971. Laboratorizing the wild rat (Rattus norvegicus). Behav. Res. Meth. Instrument. 3, 177-182.
• Boice R., 1977. Burrows of wild and albino rats: effects of domestication, outdoor raising, age, experience, and maternal state. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 91, 649-661.
• Brown R. E., 2007. Behavioural phenotyping of transgenic mice. Can. J. Exp. Psychol. 61, 328-344.
• Burt J., 2006. Rat. Reaktion Books.
• Calhoun J. B., 1963. The Ecology and Sociology of the Norway Rat. Bethesda, Maryland, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
• Castle W. E., 1947. The domestication of the rat. Genetics 33, 109-117.
• Clemens L. E., Jansson E. K. H., Portal E., Rieß O., Nguyen H. P., 2014. A behavioral comparison of the common laboratory rat strains Lister Hooded, Lewis, Fischer 344 and Wistar in an automated homecage system. Genes Brain Behav. 13, 305-321.
• Cowan P. E., 1977. Neophobia and neophilia: new-object and new-place reactions of three Rattus species. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 91, 63-71.
• Diamond J., 2002. Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domestication. Nature 418, 700-707.
• Driscolla C. A, MacDonald D. W. O'Brien S. J., 2009. From wild animals to domestic pets, an evolutionary view of domestication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA 106, 9971-9978.
• Dröscher V. B., 1993. Białe lwy muszą umrzeć. Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, Warszawa.
• Evans C. S., Smart J. L., Stoddart R. C. ,1968. Handling methods for wild house mice and wild rats. Lab. Anim. 2, 29-34.
• Finlay B. L., Sengelaub D. R., 1981. Toward a neuroethology of mammalian vision: ecology and anatomy of rodent visuomotor behavior. Behav. Brain Res. 3, 133-149.
• Galef B. G., 2005. Social learning. [W:] The behavior of the laboratory rat. Whishaw I. Q., Kolb B. (red.). Oxford University Press, New York, 363-370.
• Gottlieb G., 2007. Probabilistic epigenesis. Devel. Sci. 10, 1-11.
• Grønskov K., Ek J., Brondum-Nielsen K., 2007. Oculocutaneous albinism. Orphanet J. Rare Diseases 2, 43.
• Harker K. T., Whishaw I. Q., 2002. Place and matching-to-place spatial learning affected by rat inbreeding (Dark-Agouti, Fischer 344) and albinism (Wistar, Sprague-Dawley) but not domestication (wild rat vs. Long-Evans, Fischer-Norway). Behav. Brain Res. 134, 467-77.
• Himmler B. T., DERKSEN S. M, Stryjek R., Modlińska K., Pisula W., PELLIS S. M., 2013. How domestication modulates play behavior: A comparative analysis between wild rats and a laboratory strain of Rattus norvegicus. J. Comp. Psychol. 127, 453-464.
• Himmler B. T., Himmler S. M., Stryjek R., Modlińska K., Pisula W., Pellis S. M., 2015. The development of juvenile-typical patterns of play fighting in juvenile rats does not depend on Peer-Peer Play Experience in the Peri-Weaning Period. Int. J. Comp. Psychol. 28, 1-20.
• Himmler S. M., Modlińska K., Stryjek R., Himmler B. T., Pisula, W., Pellis S. M., 2014. Domestication and diversification: A comparative analysis of the play fighting of the Brown Norway, Sprague-Dawley, and Wistar laboratory strains of Rattus norvegicus. J. Comp. Psychol. 128, 318-327.
• Huck U. W., Price E. O., 1975. Differential effects of environmental enrichment on the open-field behavior of wild and domestic Norway rats. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 89, 892-898.
• Keeler C. E., 1942. The association of the black (non-agouti) gene with behavior in the Norway rat. J. Hered. 33, 371-384.
• King H. D., Donaldson H. H., 1929. Life processes and size of the body and organs of the gray Norway rat during ten generations in captivity. Am. Anatom. Mem. 14, 1-106.
• Lande R., 1976. Natural selection and random genetic drift in phenotypic evolution. Evolution 30, 314-334.
• Lickliter R., Ness J. W., 1990. Domestication and comparative psychology: Status and strategy. J. Comp. Psychol. 104, 211-218.
• Lockard R. B., 1968. The albino rat: a defensible choice or a bad habit? Am. Psychol. 23, 734-742.
• Masterpasqua F., 2009. Psychology and epigenetics. Rev. Gener. Psychol. 13, 194.
• Millar R. D., 1975. Free-operant comparisons of wild and domestic Norway rats. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 89, 913-922.
• Minckler J., Pease F. D., 1938. A colony of albino rats existing under feral conditions. Science 87, 460-461.
• Modlinska K., Stryjek R., Pisula, W., 2015. Food neophobia in wild and laboratory rats (multi-strain comparison). Behav. Proc. 113, 41-50.
• Mitchell D., 1976. Experiments on neophobia in wild and laboratory rats: A reevaluation. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 90, 190-197.
• Pisula W., 2009. Curiosity and information seeking in animal and human behavior. Brown Walker Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
• Pisula W., Modlinska K., Chrzanowska A., Stryjek R., 2015. Behavioural Differences in Brown-Norway and Wild-Type Rats Maintained in Standard or Enriched Environment in Response to Novelty in a Familiarised Environment. Psychology 6, 251-262.
• Price E. O., 1972. Domestication and early experience effects on escape conditioning in the Norway rat. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 79, 51.
• Price E. O., 1999. Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 65, 245-271.
• Price E. O., 2002. Animal domestication and behavior. Cabi.
• Prusky G. T., Harker K. T., Douglas R. M., Whishaw I. Q., 2002. Variation in visual acuity within pigmented, and between pigmented and albino rat strains. Behav. Brain Res. 136, 339-348.
• Richter C. P., 1959. Rats, man, and the welfare state. Am. Psychol. 14, 18-28.
• Robinson R., 1965. Genetics of the Norway rat. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
• Sachs B. D. 1996. Penile erection in response to remote cues from females: albino rats severely impaired relative to pigmented strains. Physiol. Beahv. 60, 803-808.
• Shumake S. A., Thompson R. D., Caudill C. J., 1971. Taste preference behavior of laboratory versus wild Norway rats. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 77, 489-494.
• Sławiński T., 1981. Zasady hodowli zwierząt laboratoryjnych. PWN, Warszawa.
• Stryjek R., 2008. Devices for handling small mammals in laboratory conditions. Acta Neurobiol. Exp. 68, 407-413.
• Stryjek R., 2010. Transportation device for rats. Lab. Anim. 39, 279-281.
• Stryjek R., Pisula W., 2008. Warsaw Wild Captive Pisula Stryjek rat - Establishing a breeding colony of Norway rat in captivity. Polish Psychol. Bull.39, 67-70.
• Stryjek R., Modlinska K., 2013. A thigmotaxis-based method of recapturing and transporting small mammals in the laboratory. Lab. Anim. 9, 321-324.
• Stryjek R., Modlińska K., Pisula W., 2012a. Species specific behavioral patterns (digging and swimming) and reaction to novel objects in wild type, Wistar, Sprague-Dawley and Brown Norway rats. PLoS One 7, 1-10.
• Stryjek R., Modlińska K., Pisula W., 2012b. Response to spatial and nonspatial change in wild (WWCPS) and Wistar rats. Polish Psychol. Bull. 43, 124-131.
• Stryjek R., Modlińska K., Turlejski K., Pisula W., 2013. Circadian rhythm of outside-nest activity in wild (WWCPS) vs albino and pigmented laboratory rats. PloS One 8, e66055.
• Trut L., 1999. Early Canid Domestication: The Farm-Fox Experiment. Am. Sci. 87, 160-169.
• Whishaw I. Q., Gorny B., Foroud A., Klei J. A., 2003. Long-Evans and Sprague-Dawley rats have similar skilled reaching success and limb representations in motor cortex but different movements: some cautionary insights into the selection of rat strains for neurobiological motor research. Behav. Brain Res. 145, 221-232.