Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 5, 2026
08:38
Habituation and Prepulse Inhibition of Acoustic Startle in Rodents
Published on: September 1, 2011
76.0K
Acoustic startle modification as a tool for evaluating auditory function of the mouse: Progress, pitfalls, and
Amanda M Lauer1, Derik Behrens2, Georg Klump2
1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and Center for Hearing and Balance, Johns Hopkins University, 515 Traylor Building, 720 Rutland Ave., Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
|March 23, 2017
Summary
Acoustic startle response (ASR) and prepulse inhibition (PPI) are not sensitive substitutes for traditional operant techniques in rodents. Extensive pilot testing is needed, limiting their practical advantages for auditory processing research.
Area of Science:
- Neuroscience
- Behavioral Science
- Auditory Neuroscience
Background:
- Acoustic startle response (ASR) modification procedures, including prepulse inhibition (PPI), are increasingly utilized in rodent research.
- These methods are favored for assessing auditory processing and sensorimotor gating due to perceived ease and speed.
- However, variability and confounding factors challenge the reliability and interpretation of ASR and PPI results.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the utility of ASR and PPI procedures in rodent behavioral research.
- To compare the sensitivity of PPI with traditional operant psychoacoustic techniques.
- To identify limitations and specific circumstances for employing ASR measures.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing literature on ASR and PPI procedures in rodents.
- Comparative analysis of the sensitivity of PPI versus operant psychoacoustic methods.
- Discussion of non-auditory variables influencing ASR and PPI outcomes.
Main Results:
- ASR and PPI procedures exhibit significant variability across experimental conditions and studies.
- These measures demonstrate lower sensitivity compared to traditional operant techniques for auditory assessment.
- Optimizing ASR and PPI experiments requires substantial pilot testing, diminishing time-saving benefits.
Conclusions:
- ASR and PPI are generally not suitable replacements for established operant psychoacoustic methods due to insufficient sensitivity.
- The extensive optimization required for ASR/PPI negates potential time advantages.
- ASR measures may be valuable in specific cases, such as assessing auditory function in mouse models with hearing loss or learning deficits.
