There were no differences in consumption or learn more preference between B6NT and B6J mice and their hybrid counterparts
for saccharin or quinine (Table 1). These data suggest that there are no differences in taste reactivity between the inbred and related hybrid lines. Table 1 Saccharin and quinine consumption and preference are similar in respective hybrid and inbred lines (n= 10–12 per group) Limited-intermittent access binge drinking To measure binge-like ethanol consumption, we provided mice with limited Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and intermittent access to ethanol during their circadian dark cycle (Neasta et al. 2010). Using this model, mice achieve levels of ethanol consumption ranging from 3 to 7 g/kg per 4-h session. Comparison of the patterns of drinking across all sessions showed that B6129S6 hybrids consistently consumed less ethanol than B6NT mice with a significant main effect of
strain [F(1, 140) = 9.34, P= 0.006] and session [F(7, 140) = 9.66, P < 0.001] but no strain by session interaction Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical [F(7, 140) = 1.60, P= 0.666] (Fig. 2a). B6129X1 hybrids overall also drank less than B6J mice with a significant main effect of strain [F(1, 154) = 19.60, P= 0.002] and session [F(7, 154) = 3.64, P= 0.0012] and a strain by session interaction [F(7, 154) = 2.51, P= 0.0181] that was Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical significant by post-hoc testing at day 7 (Fig. 2b). In contrast, B6129S4 hybrids drank similarly to B6J mice, with no main effect of strain [F(1, 153) = 2.46, P= 0.131] but a significant effect of Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical session [F(7, 153) = 10.60, P < 0.001] and no significant strain by session interaction [F(7, 153) = 1.49, P= 0.176] (Fig. 2c). We also detected these differences when we compared ethanol consumption over all eight binge-drinking sessions; B6129S6
hybrids consumed less ethanol than B6NT mice (P < 0.0001) and B6129X1 hybrids less than B6J mice (P < 0.0001), but B6129S4 hybrids drank slightly more than B6J mice (P < 0.05) (Table 2). Table 2 Average ethanol consumption during Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical limited-intermittent ethanol access. Ethanol clearance Since differences in ethanol metabolism could influence ethanol consumption, we measured the rate of ethanol clearance by administering a hypnotic dose (4 g/kg, i.p.) of ethanol and collecting blood samples at several time points thereafter. B6NT mice cleared ethanol more rapidly than B6129S6 hybrid mice [Ftime(4, 40) = 18.85, P < 0.0001; Fstrain(1, 40) = 7.14, P= 0.02; Ftime × strain(4, 40) = 3.41, P= 0.02; Fig. 3a]. For the B6J versus B6129X1 comparison, there was tuclazepam a significant main effect of time [F(4, 40) = 6.18, P= 0.0006], but not for strain, and no significant strain by time interaction (Fig. 3b). There was a significant main effect of time [F(4, 40) = 13.87, P < 0.0001] and a strain by time interaction [F(4, 40) = 2.80, P= 0.04] for the B6J versus B6129S4 comparison, but post-hoc testing did not reveal significant differences between strains at individual time points (Fig. 3c).