This protocol describes an animal model for studying how early-life adversity, provoked by an impoverished environment and unpredictable maternal care during the early postnatal period, affects brain development and the future risk of mental disorders.
Early-life adversity (ELA), such as abuse, neglect, lack of resources, and an unpredictable home environment, is a known risk factor for developing neuropsychiatric disorders such as depression. Animal models for ELA have been used to study the impact of chronic stress on brain development, and typically rely on manipulating the quality and/or quantity of maternal care, as this is the major source of early-life experiences in mammals, including humans. Here, a detailed protocol for employing the Limited Bedding and Nesting (LBN) model in mice is provided. This model mimics a low-resource environment, which provokes fragmented and unpredictable patterns of maternal care during a critical developmental window (postnatal days 2-9) by limiting the amount of nesting materials given to the dam to build a nest for her pups and separating the mice from the bedding via a mesh platform in the cage. Representative data are provided to illustrate the changes in maternal behavior, as well as the diminished pup weights and long-term changes in basal corticosterone levels, that result from the LBN model. As adults, offspring reared in the LBN environment have been shown to exhibit an aberrant stress response, cognitive deficits, and anhedonia-like behavior. Therefore, this model is an important tool to define how the maturation of stress-sensitive brain circuits is altered by ELA and results in long-term behavioral changes that confer vulnerability to mental disorders.
The early postnatal period is a critical developmental window in which environmental influences can shift the trajectory of development. For example, early-life adversity (ELA) can alter brain development to provoke long-term changes in cognitive and emotional function. Examples of ELA include physical or emotional abuse, neglect, inadequate resources, and an unpredictable home environment occurring during childhood or adolescence1. It is known that ELA is a risk factor for developing disorders such as depression, substance use disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and anxiety2,3,4,5. This is important given that the levels of childhood poverty in the US have more than doubled recently, from 5.2% in 2021 to 12.4% in 20226, and although poverty itself is not necessarily ELA, it does increase the probability of various types of ELA7.
Animal models have long been essential for understanding the effects of early-life stress on brain development and adult outcomes. The two main animal models used in recent years to dissect this phenomenon are maternal separation (MS) and an impoverished environment induced by limited bedding and nesting materials (LBN). MS was developed as a model of parental deprivation8. In it, rodent dams are taken away from their pups, usually for several hours, every day until weaning8. The MS paradigm has been found to result in depressive- and anxiety-like behaviors in adulthood9, as well as an aberrant response to chronic stress10,11. On the other hand, the LBN model, first developed in the Baram laboratory12, does not separate the dam from the pups, but rather modifies the environment in which the pups are reared, mimicking a low-resource environment12,13. Decreasing the amount of nesting material and preventing direct access to the bedding in this model results in disrupted maternal care from the dams3. Since robust and predictable maternal care is required for the proper development of cognitive and emotional brain circuits14, fragmented maternal care from LBN can result in a range of outcomes, including an over-active Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis, shifted excitatory-inhibitory balance in multiple brain regions, increased corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) levels, and depressive-like behavior in the offspring13,15,16,17,18,19.
The exact mechanism by which ELA results in increased risk for neuropsychiatric disorders is not completely understood. It is thought to be related to alterations in the HPA axis circuitry19,20, and recent evidence shows that this may be caused by changes in microglial synaptic pruning19. The LBN model has been shown to be a crucial tool for understanding the perinatal environment's impact on brain development and long-term behavioral outcomes. Although this model was initially developed for rats, it has also been adapted for mice in order to take advantage of the existing transgenic tools12,13. Notably, the model is very similar in both species and provokes highly convergent outcomes, such as alterations in the HPA axis, cognitive deficits, and depressive-like behavior, thus highlighting its cross-species utility and translational potential. This article will provide a detailed description of how to employ the limited bedding and nesting model in mice, collecting and analyzing maternal behavior and offspring outcomes to validate the model's efficacy and the expected results.
All of the procedures involving animals were performed in compliance with the National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee from Georgia State University (approval number A24011). The mice were bred and maintained in the Animal Facilities at Georgia State University. The experiments were performed on a C57BL/6J strain during the perinatal period (postnatal day [P] 2-10) and included males and females. The reagents and equipment used for this study are listed in the Table of Materials.
1. Material setup
2. Limited bedding and nesting (LBN) paradigm
Figure 1: Example of cage setup. The cage on the left side of the image shows a standard control (CTL) cage containing a full amount of bedding and a full nestlet. The cage on the right side shows a limited bedding and nesting (LBN) setup with half the amount of bedding, half a nestlet, and a mesh divider for separating the animals from the bedding. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
3. Maternal behavior scoring
Type of behavior | Abbreviation | Description | ||||
Licking / grooming | LG | The dam is engaged in licking/grooming her pups. | ||||
Active nursing | AN | The dam is nursing her pups standing up, while her back is arched. | ||||
New active nursing | N-AN | This behavior is used specifically when the dam interrupted nursing but quickly resumes. This is an exception to the 3s rule. | ||||
Low nursing | LN | The dam is actively nursing her pups, but her back is low or almost flat. This behavior commonly follows AN after a period of time. | ||||
Side Nursing | SN | The dam is lying on her side when nursing (also known as passive nursing). | ||||
Off nest | O | The dam is not on the nest, and she is not eating/drinking. This can be observed in her walking around the cage or exploring. | ||||
Eating/drinking | E | The dam is off the nest eating or drinking. | ||||
Self-grooming | SG | The dam is grooming herself. | ||||
Carrying pups | C | The dam carries the pups, usually to relocate them back to the nest. | ||||
Nest building | NB | The dam is actively constructing or relocating the nest. | ||||
Move on nest | M | The dam is moving on the nest. This presents with the dam interacting with the pups in a way different than LG or any type of nursing, such as sniffing, rearing, or stepping on the pups. |
Table 1: Description of the maternal care behaviors.
4. Maternal behavior data analysis
5. Calculation of entropy
NOTE: Entropy, or unpredictability, of maternal care behaviors is calculated based on the method proposed by Vegetabile et al.23. This method is based on the assumption that maternal care behaviors act as a Markov chain, which can be used to estimate the entropy rate of a behavioral sequence. Each dam's sequence of behaviors is characterized using the empirical transition matrix <pij> i,j = 1…7 of conditional probabilities of moving from one behavior (i) to another behavior (j), and the entropy rate is calculated from this as previously described3,23 and as follows:
where pij is the conditional probability that behavior j is observed next after a dam is observed performing behavior i, πi is the frequency with which behavior i is observed, and M (=7) is the total number of different behaviors. The reader is referred to Vegetabile et al.23 for a discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of the equations; here, the focus is on how to apply the method in the LBN model.
The representative results demonstrate how ELA, imposed by an impoverished environment in LBN cages, affects maternal care from dams and offspring physiological outcomes. The daily entropy in maternal care behavior is higher in LBN across days P3-P6 (F1,58 = 7.21, p = 0.0094; Figure 2A), as well as the average entropy of each dam from this time period (t15 = 3.03, p = 0.0085; Figure 2B). Notably, there is no significant difference in average entropy rate across different litters from the same dam when maintained within the same treatment group (F1.699,4.247 = 0.57, p = 0.58; Figure 2C), suggesting that entropy rate may be a somewhat stable trait for each dam. Amongst all of the behaviors, licking and grooming is the one that has been shown to be most fragmented by LBN3. The LBN dams display a higher frequency of licking and grooming their pups (LG) (t16 = 4.04, p = 0.0010; Figure 2D) and in shorter bouts (t16 = 3.25, p = 0.0050; Figure 2E). However, there is no significant difference in the total duration of LG between the Control and LBN dams (t16 = 1.52, p = 0.15; Figure 2F).
Figure 2: Maternal behavior analysis. (A) The daily entropy rate is higher in limited bedding and nesting (LBN) dams vs. control (CTL) as analyzed by the mixed-effects model (F1,58 = 7.21, p = 0.0094). (B) The average entropy rate is higher in LBN dams vs. CTL (t15 = 3.03, p = 0.0085). (C) The average entropy rate (P3-P6) is not significantly different across multiple litters within the same dam when maintained in the same treatment group (F1.699,4.247 = 0.57, p = 0.58). Each line represents a single dam. (D) The cumulative frequency of licking and grooming (LG) events is higher for LG dams vs. CTL (t16 = 4.04, p = 0.0010). (E) The LG average bout length is shorter for LG dams vs. CTL (t16 = 3.25, p = 0.0050). (F) The cumulative time spent on LG is not significantly different due to LBN (t16 = 1.52, p = 0.15). Data are mean ± SEM, * p < 0.05. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Pups that were reared in LBN conditions are significantly smaller at P10 (t61 = 6.30, p < 0.0001; Figure 3A). This difference typically persists at weaning age (t62 = 6.29, p = <0.0001; Figure 3B) but is no longer observed by adulthood (t38 = 1.08, p = 0.29; Figure 3C). However, corticosterone levels are increased at baseline in adulthood (t18.79 = 2.23, p = 0.038; Figure 3D), suggesting enduring physiological effects of LBN. These are the expected differences in a successful experimental setup. In the case of a suboptimal setup, the values of LG bout length, entropy, and pup weights may present no differences, likely due to a stressed "Control" group. For the purposes of this paper, sex was collapsed when analyzing offspring outcomes because sex differences are not typically observed in the physiological outcomes described here; however, sex differences in other types of outcomes, such as cognitive and emotional behavior, are commonly reported in this model and should be investigated further4.
Figure 3: Offspring outcomes. (A) Limited bedding and nesting (LBN) decreases pup weight measured at P10, just before return to standard cages (t61 = 6.30, p < 0.0001). (B) Weight is still decreased by LBN at the weaning age (t62 = 6.29, p < 0.0001). (C) Adult weight no longer differs due to LBN (t38 = 1.08, p = 0.29). (D) The baseline concentration of corticosterone in adulthood is increased by LBN, as analyzed by Welch's t-test (t18.79 = 2.23, p = 0.038). For all graphs, females are shown with circles and males with triangles. Data are mean ± SEM, *p < 0.05. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
This article provides a detailed protocol to apply the LBN model in mice. This model is an important tool for understanding how an ethologically and translationally relevant form of chronic stress in early life contributes to the development of neuropsychiatric disorders in the offspring13. It is also useful for studying maternal behavior and any changes in the dams' brain from a molecular, neuroendocrine, or circuit-based perspective24. For these types of questions, multiparity may be a more important variable to consider. We have observed that maternal behavior entropy scores remain consistent across multiple litters within the same dam (Figure 2C), suggesting that entropy may be a somewhat stable trait for each dam. This finding may justify the use of multiparous female mice when it is not feasible to use only nulliparous females, such as in the case of costly or rare transgenic mice. Due to the possible unintended effects of multiparity on other variables (e.g., intrauterine environment), it is recommended that the experimenter statistically control for the use of multiparous females during data analysis.
It is important to note that this model is highly sensitive to environmental disturbances. Multiple factors can disrupt the animals, causing problems and suboptimal results, such as cage flooding or loud noises such as from nearby construction. Usually, these disturbances will result in Control animals becoming stressed, and therefore, there will be no differences between the Control and LBN conditions. An indicator of these problems may be similar weights in Control and LBN pups at P10 and similar entropy values in maternal care behavior. Because of this, the ideal setup is a maternal care room that is only used for this purpose, quiet and away from the colony and other laboratory personnel. Disturbances can also lead to cannibalism of pups, especially in dams younger than P75. The risk of losing pups to cannibalism is lower in dams after P75 and often after the first litter. An alternative version of this method shifts the timing of the experimental manipulation to P4-P11 in order to decrease the risk of cannibalism even further25,26; although this is not necessary in the present laboratory conditions. Another version of LBN does not employ a mesh divider but still limits the amount of bedding and nesting material for the entire pre-weaning postnatal period27. It is important to note that changing the timeline may lead to different results, such as abusive maternal behavior, which may, in turn, result in different offspring outcomes, such as anxiety-like behaviors25,28. Other common problems include losing maternal behavior data due to the camera angle and large nest size; to help with this, it is advised to put a mirror in the back of the cage and be sure to only provide a single nestlet in the control condition in order to prevent the nest from becoming too large and concealing the pups from the camera. Finally, ensuring the mesh fits properly in the cage to prevent pups from getting stuck or hurt is essential.
An advantage of the LBN model is that it is easily customized and combined with other experimental factors. Examples of the variables that can be added to this protocol are diet29,30, immune challenges30,31, different transgenic lines32,33, and chemogenetics19. Moreover, some versions of this model employ a P10-P17 time frame and combine it with maternal separation (MS)34,35,36. This paradigm has also been adapted as a prenatal stressor, where dams are housed in the LBN environment from E14 to E1937,38, but the pups are never exposed to the stress directly. Finally, some studies use a two-hit model that involves ELA combined with different stress tests on the offspring when they reach adulthood19,39.
One of the limitations of this method is that it does not have a high throughput. The amount of data it produces is limited by the number of cameras and space available at one time, although the litters can easily be staggered over time. The manual scoring of maternal behavior is especially time-consuming and may introduce observer bias, but automated scoring is currently being developed40, thanks to the advent of machine learning-based approaches. If data are hand-scored, it is recommended that the same person scores all of the videos for one experiment in order to decrease inter-observer variability. Another limitation is that this model is designed for rodents that rely primarily on maternal care, making it difficult to study biparental care. However, some groups have adopted paternal deprivation as an alternative to MS in biparental species such as the California mouse41,42, so it is conceivable that LBN could also be adapted for these species.
Aside from LBN, maternal separation is the other most prominent model for ELA, because other forms of stress employed in adults (i.e., restraint stress) are not ethologically relevant and do not affect pups the same way. LBN differs from MS because it is a form of chronic stress that induces fragmented and unpredictable maternal behavior, whereas, in MS, deprivation is intermittent and usually occurs at predictable times each day43. Interestingly, both models can cause changes in the HPA axis and depressive-like behaviors in rodents, although LBN may be a more reproducible protocol with less experimenter interaction and higher consistency across laboratories1,11,13,16. Although this protocol is useful in mitigating some sources of variability (such as experimenter-related), other aspects like differences in animal facilities, origin of the animals, or strain can influence the results. For example, it is known that BALB/c mice have a more pronounced response to chronic restraint stress and may be differentially sensitive to ELA than C57BL/6J27,44.
In conclusion, the LBN model employs a low-resource environment with unpredictable maternal care and is a useful approach to understanding how early-life stress affects a wide variety of processes, such as physiological adaptations to stress, maternal behavior, and brain development. Notably, this model has been employed to understand how and why ELA is a risk factor for neuropsychiatric disorders1,5,9,12. In the future, the use of LBN will enhance our understanding of the biological basis of both mental and physical disorders and help elucidate novel therapeutic targets to treat the effects of stress during the sensitive perinatal period.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
This work was supported by NIMH K99/R00 Pathway to Independence Award #MH120327, Whitehall Foundation Grant #2022-08-051, and NARSAD Young Investigator Grant #31308 from the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation and The John and Polly Sparks Foundation. The authors would like to thank the Division of Animal Resources at Georgia State University for providing exceptional care to our animals., and Ryan Sleeth for his excellent technical support in setting up and maintaining our video management system. Dr. Bolton would also like to thank Dr. Tallie Z. Baram for excellent training in the proper implementation of the LBN model during her postdoctoral fellowship.
2-inch 4 MP 4x Zoom IR Mini PT Dome Network Camera | Hikvision | DS-2DE2A404IW-DE3(S6) | |
Amazon Basics Aluminum Light Photography Tripod Stand with Case – Pack of 2, 2.8 – 6.7 Feet, 3.66 Pounds, Black | Amazon | From Amazon | |
Blue Iris | Blue Iris Security | Optional video management software | |
CAMVATE 1/4"-20 Mini Ball Head with Ceiling Mount for CCTV & Video Wall Monitors Mount – 1991 | Camvate | From Amazon | |
Corn cob bedding | The Andersons | 4B | |
Cotton nestlet | Ancare | NES3600 | |
Mesh divider | McNICHOLS | 4700313244 | Standard, Aluminum, Alloy 3003-H14, 3/16" No. .032 Standard (Raised), 70% Open Area |
Tendelux DI20 IR Illuminator | Tendelux | From Amazon |
.