Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-31T01:32:54.559Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Early life undernutrition in rats

3. Motor performance in adulthood

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2009

J. L. Smart
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
K. S. Bedi
Affiliation:
Department of Child Health, University of Manchester, The Medical School, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. A detailed investigation was made of the motor performance of rats which had impaired cerebellar and muscular growth resulting from early-life undernutrition.

2. Developing rats were growth-retarded by underfeeding their mothers during pregnancy and lactation. They were fed ad lib. from 25 d of age.

3. Adult male previously-undernourished (PU) and well-fed control rats were given tests of motor behaviour commencing at 5 months of age. They were required to run backwards to maintain their position on a revolving drum. Aspects of the test situation were varied systematically: visual environment, interval between trials, test duration and drum speed.

4. PU rats had a 29% body-weight deficit compared with controls at 5 months.

5. There was no evidence of impaired motor performance by the PU rats under any of the test conditions.

Type
Papers of direct reference to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1982

References

Abbey, H. & Howard, E. (1973). Devl Psychobiol. 6, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adlard, B. P. F., Dobbing, J. & Smart, J. L. (1973). Biol. Neonate 23, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, J., Anderson, W. J. & Strop, M. (1971). Physiol. Behav. 7, 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedi, K. S., Birzgalis, A. R., Mahon, M., Smart, J. L. & Wareham, A. C. (1982). Br. J. Nutr. 47, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chase, H. P., Lindsley, W. F. B. & O'Brien, D. (1969). Nature, Lond. 221, 554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culley, W. J. & Lineberger, R. O. (1968). J. Nutr. 96, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galler, J. R. & Turkewitz, G. (1977). Physiol. Behav. 19, 697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, H. A. (1968). Physiol. Behav. 3, 619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, T. C. & Howells, K. F. (1978). Brain Res. 157, 202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, T. C., Howells, K. F. & Piggott, S. M. (1979). Behav. Neurol Biol. 25, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, A., Dobbing, J., Adlard, B. P. F. & Smart, J. L. (1976). Biol. Neonate 28, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, A., Smart, J. L. & Dobbing, J. (1975). Brain Res. 83, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheirer, C. J., Ray, W. S. & Hare, N. (1976). Biometrics 32, 429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seamer, J. & Peto, S. (1969). Lab. Anim. 3, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slob, A. K., Snow, C. E. & de Natris-Mathot, E. (1973). Devl Psychobiol. 6, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smart, J. L., Dobbing, J., Adlard, B. P. F., Lynch, A. & Sands, J. (1973). J. Nutr. 103, 1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wareham, A. C., Mahon, M., Bedi, K. S. & Smart, J. L. (1982). Br. J. Nutr. 47, 433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar