spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online May 21, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 2013-2024 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.001974
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vaanholt, L. M.
Right arrow Articles by Visser, G. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vaanholt, L. M.
Right arrow Articles by Visser, G. H.

Behavioural and physiological responses to increased foraging effort in male mice

Lobke M. Vaanholt1,*, Berber De Jong1, Theodore Garland, Jr2, Serge Daan1 and G. Henk Visser1,3

1 University of Groningen, Department of Behavioural Biology, Kerklaan 30, 9751 NN Haren, The Netherlands
2 University of California, Riverside, Department of Biology, Riverside, CA 92521, USA
3 University of Groningen, Centre for Isotope Research, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands


Figure 1
View larger version (5K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Relationship between spontaneous wheel-running activity (RWA BL) and maximum wheel-running activity (RWA MX) in control mice (C, open circles) and mice selectively bred for high wheel-running activity (S, closed circles). Linear regression gave the following equations: combining both groups, RWA MX=0.35 RWA BL+20.1 (r2=0.09, n.s.); for C mice, RWA MX=–0.22 RWA BL+27.6 (r2=0.02, n.s.) and for S mice, RWA MX=0.84 RWA BL+15.2 (r2=0.47, n.s.). The line shows where x=y.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Circadian pattern of wheel-running activity in control (C, open symbols) and activity-selected mice (S, closed symbols) running spontaneously (circles) or running for food (triangles). Each symbol plots the mean distance ran in hourly bins (e.g. bin 12=from 12:00 until 13:00). Vertical bars are inter-individual s.e.m. The black bar on top represents the dark phase.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Development of wheel-running activity, body mass and food intake during training and at a workload of 90% from the maximal capacity in Workload animals (C and S groups pooled). Spontaneous wheel-running activity is shown for the 2 weeks prior to the training period (day 0). Circles show the development of the different variables during the experiment in the Workload animals, and triangles represent mean values for mice in the Ad-lib group.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Relationship between body mass and metabolic rates (A) and between wheel-running activity and metabolic rates (B) at baseline (open symbols) and workload (closed symbols) conditions in Workload animals. Triangles represent the RMR and circles represent DEE. Regression lines for all relationships are drawn. For equations of the regression lines, r2 and P values, see Table 4. Results of multiple regressions are presented in the text.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Energy budget of Workload mice during baseline and workload conditions. Panel A shows the absolute values and panel B the mass-specific values. To determine the energy balance we used measures of resting metabolic rate (RMR, light-grey bars) and daily energy expenditure (DEE). Energy for activity (ACT, darker grey bars) was calculated by deducting RMR from DEE. In addition, the gross energy intake (GEI) was calculated on the basis of the absolute food intake during the DLW measurements. Metabolisable energy intake (MEI, striped bars) was then calculated from GEI, assuming that digestive efficiency together with energy lost in the urine was 79.1% (Hambly and Speakman, 2005Go). The white bars represent the energetic value of the food that is not metabolized (GEI–MEI=Waste, W). The numbers in the bars represent the amount of energy (either in kJ d–1 or in kJ g–1 d–1) spent on each part of the energy budget. The bracket shows the surplus energy available to the animals for growth.

 




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2007