All chambers were equipped with a Med Associates VideoFreeze System (Med Associates, VT, USA) and enclosed in a sound attenuating box with a near infrared (NIR) light source as described previously (Park et al. 2017 (link)). Two distinct contexts/chambers were housed in separate rooms and were arbitrarily named Context A and B, and they differed in shape, visual, and olfactory cues as previously described (Park et al. 2017 (link)).
Videofreeze system
Manufactured by Med Associates
Sourced in United States
The VideoFreeze system is a laboratory equipment designed for the visualization and analysis of biological samples. It provides real-time video capture and high-resolution image freezing capabilities to support various research applications.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
16 protocols using videofreeze system
1
Contextual Fear Conditioning Setup
2
Contextual Fear Conditioning in Rodents
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Behavioral training used fear conditioning chambers (30 × 25 × 25 cm, Med-Associates, Inc St. Albans, VT), equipped with a Med-Associates VideoFreeze system. The boxes were enclosed in larger sound-attenuating chambers in an individual, dedicated experimental room. The context was comprised of a chamber with aluminum sidewalls and a white Plexiglas rear wall. The grid floor consisted of 16 stainless steel rods (4.8 mm thick) spaced 1.6 cm apart (center to center). The ceiling was clear Plexiglas with a central hole allowing for passage of fiberoptic cables. Pans underlying each box were sprayed with a thin film of 50% Windex solution to provide the context with a scent. Chambers were individually lit from above by white lights and cleaned with 50% Windex in between trials. Fans mounted above each chamber provided background noise (60 dB). The experimental room was brightly lit with an overhead white light. Animals were kept in a holding room and individually transported to the experimental room in their home cage. On the first day of training, animals were transported to the habituation cart for cable attachment before conditioning, and returned to the cart for cable disconnection afterward. Chambers were cleaned with a Virkon solution following each day of behavioral testing.
3
Contextual Fear Conditioning Behavioral Assay
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Behavioral experiments were conducted using Contextual Near Infra-red Fear Conditioning System and Video Freeze system (Med Associates, VT, USA). The dimensions of the chambers were as described previously (Ganella et al., 2016 (link)), with the grid floor composed of 19 × 4.8 mm stainless steel rods that delivered scrambled electric shocks as needed. The chambers were located in two individual rooms to provide two different contexts (Context A and Context B) for conditioning and extinction, as described previously (Ganella et al., 2016 (link)). Briefly, Context A had houselights on, round stickers on the back wall with wood chip bedding beneath the grid floor, and cleaned with soap containing a mild eucalyptus odor. Context B had curved walls, and a tray of paper towel placed beneath the grid floor, and cleaned with 80% v/v ethanol.
4
Contextual Fear Conditioning and Neurogenesis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Contextual fear conditioning was performed using a VideoFreeze system from Med Associates. Conditioned animals received a single training session daily for six consecutive days. For each session mice were placed in a distinctive context (the shock chamber) and after an initial baseline period of 2 min, received 5 footshocks (0.8 mA, 1 s) through the grid floor over a 20 min period. BrdU (100 mg kg−1) was administered via intraperitoneal injections, given twice daily, 6 h apart following training, and mice were killed 24 h after the final injection. Immediately prior to killing, contextual fear conditioning was assayed by measuring freezing upon re-exposure to the conditioning context for 4 min in the absence of footshock. Freezing was quantified using automatic freezing detection software (Med Associates), and expressed as a percentage of time spent freezing across the test session. Naive animals served as controls, receiving injections in the animal housing facility. Animals used for the neurosphere assay experiment did not receive any BrdU injections.
5
Automated Fear Conditioning Assessments
6
Fear Conditioning Behavioral Paradigm
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Behavioral training used fear conditioning chambers (30 × 25×25 cm, Med-Associates, Inc St. Albans, VT), equipped with a Med-Associates VideoFreeze system. The boxes were enclosed in larger sound-attenuating chambers. Aspects of the boxes were varied to create two distinct contexts. The pre-exposure and testing context were composed of a white Plexiglas floor insert and a curved white Plexiglas wall insert with a hole over the wall speaker, making the rear walls of the chamber into a semi-circle. The ceiling and front door were composed of clear Plexiglas. The overhead light was off and the box was cleaned with 1% acetic acid. The conditioning context was comprised of a rectangular chamber with aluminum sidewalls and a white Plexiglas rear wall. The grid floor consisted of 16 stainless steel rods (4.8 mm thick) spaced 1.6 cm apart (center to center). Pans underlying each box were sprayed and cleaned between mice. Fans mounted above each chamber provided background noise (65 dB). The experimental room was brightly lit with an overhead white light. Animals were kept in a holding room and individually transported to the experimental room in their home cage. Chambers were cleaned with soap and water following each day of behavioral testing.
7
Contextual and Cued Fear Conditioning in Mice
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Mice were tested in individual conditioning chambers. The VideoFreeze system (Med Associates) was used to assess behavior as described previously (Anagnostaras et al., 2010 (link); Carmack et al., 2014 (link)). Training consisted of one 10-min session. Mice were placed in chambers and baseline activity was assessed for 2 min. Mice then received three tone-shock pairings beginning at minutes 2, 3, and 4. Tone-shock pairings consisted of a 30-s tone (2.8 kHz, 90 dB) that co-terminated with a 2-s scrambled AC foot shock (0.75 mA, RMS). Twenty-four hours post-training, mice were returned to the training context. Once mice were placed in the chambers, freezing was measured for 5 min to assess fear to the context. Twenty-four hours after the context test a 5 min tone test was conducted to assess cued memory. The context was altered on multiple dimensions. White acrylic sheets were placed over the grid floors, a black plastic triangular insert was used to alter wall shape, and chambers were cleaned and scented with a 5% vinegar solution. Near-infrared light was used, in the absence of white light, to create a dark environment. The test consisted of a 2-min baseline period followed by the presentation of three 30-s tones (2.8 kHz, 90 dBA) at minutes 2, 3, and 4. The tones matched those used during training.
8
Fear Conditioning and LM-4131 Effects
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Mice were conditioned using the stress exposure procedure described above. Six hours later, mice were administered either vehicle or LM-4131 (10 mg/kg). Two hours later and again 16 hr later, mice were returned to the conditioned chamber for a 10-minute test. The VideoFreeze system (Med Associates) was used to measure freezing: defined as no movement other than breathing and measured when mouse movement fell below a preset motion threshold of 18.
9
Contextual Fear Conditioning Protocol
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
From P43, a conditioned fear paradigm was given during the light-phase in previously described apparatus (Park et al., 2017 (link); Zbukvic et al., 2017 (link)). Two distinct contexts located in separate rooms were used. In brief, context A had stainless-steel side walls and an opaque Perspex® rear wall with round stickers, with a tray of aspen bedding underneath the flooring, and cleaned with a eucalyptus-scented agent. Context B had a curved white Perspex® wall insert, with a tray lined with two paper towels underneath and cleaned with 80% ethanol. The Med Associates VideoFreeze® System (Med Associates, VT, USA) was used to program the delivery of all auditory and foot-shock stimuli, and to record all freezing behaviors using infrared cameras. The following protocol was used for behavioral testing:
10
Contextual Fear Conditioning in Mice
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!