Short photoperiod inhibition of growth in body mass and reproduction in ACI, BUF, and PVG inbred rats.

Reproduction

Department of Biology, College of William and Mary, PO Box 8795, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, USA.

Published: December 2004

AI Article Synopsis

  • Laboratory rats show genetic variability in photoresponsiveness, with certain strains demonstrating significant effects from short winter photoperiods on reproductive development, food intake, and body mass.
  • Young males of inbred strains (Fischer, Brown Norway, ACI, PVG, BUF) exhibited reduced reproductive organ masses and body mass under short photoperiod conditions, while Harlan Sprague Dawley rats showed minimal response unless influenced by food restriction.
  • The findings suggest that the photoresponsiveness trait is more common in laboratory rat strains than previously believed, indicating that standard research practices may inadvertently affect study outcomes by not accounting for these variations.

Article Abstract

Laboratory rats have been generally considered non-photoresponsive, but strains of laboratory rats have been found to be variable for this trait. Young males of both the Fischer (F344) and Brown Norway strains (BN) suppress reproductive development, food intake and body mass in short winter photoperiod (short days (SD); 8 h light:16 h darkness), and food restriction interacts with SD to enhance the effect of SD alone. Conversely, young male Harlan Sprague Dawley outbred rats, along with other outbred laboratory rats tested, have little or no response to SD except when unmasked by food restriction or other treatments, and have generally been considered nonphotoperiodic. In order to assess how widespread this trait might be among rat strains, and to test for uncoupling of reproductive and nonreproductive responses, we tested 3 additional inbred strains, including ACI, PVG and BUF rats, for photoresponsiveness and for unmasking of photoperiodic responses by food restriction. Young males of all three inbred strains exhibited photoresponsiveness in testis mass (5-20% lower in SD), seminal vesicle mass (20-50% lower in SD), and body mass (5-10% lower in SD). Food restriction also suppressed reproduction, but there was little or no interaction with the effects of photoperiod. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that laboratory rats are genetically variable for photoperiodism, and that photoresponsiveness may be widespread among inbred rat strains, as all five inbred strains tested have shown photoperiodic responses. The results are particularly important because standard research protocols may unknowingly manipulate this pathway in rats, causing unsuspected variability among or within studies.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/rep.1.00390DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

laboratory rats
16
food restriction
16
body mass
12
inbred strains
12
rats
8
generally considered
8
young males
8
rat strains
8
photoperiodic responses
8
strains
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!