Developmental changes in the electroencephalogram and responses to a noxious stimulus in anaesthetized tammar wallaby joeys (Macropus eugenii eugenii)

13Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The tammar wallaby joey is born extremely immature and most of its neurological development occurs in the maternal pouch. It is not known at what in-pouch age functions such as conscious sensory perception commence. We determined the electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to noxious stimulation in lightly anaesthetized tammar wallaby joeys. Baseline median (F50) and spectral edge (F95) frequencies, total power (Ptot) and frequency spectra between 1 and 30 Hz of the EEG power spectrum were determined. Joeys aged less than 127 days showed little or no EEG activity. Prolonged periods of spontaneous EEG activity were present by 142 days. This activity increased, as did the power in all frequencies, while the duration of any intervening isoelectric periods decreased with increasing in-pouch age. EEG responses to a noxious stimulus (toe clamping) changed with increasing in-pouch age as there was no response from joeys aged 94-127 days (no EEG), a minimal decrease in the F50 in those aged between 142 and 181 days (P = 0.052) and a greater decrease in the F50 in those aged between 187 and 261 days (P < 0.001). The pattern of these changes, which presumably reflects anatomical and functional maturation of the cerebral cortex, is similar to, but develops more slowly than, that reported in the rat. The opening of the eyes and development of the pelage are discussed as markers of when brain development may be sufficient for joeys to consciously perceive noxious sensations including pain.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Diesch, T. J., Mellor, D. J., Johnson, C. B., & Lentle, R. G. (2010). Developmental changes in the electroencephalogram and responses to a noxious stimulus in anaesthetized tammar wallaby joeys (Macropus eugenii eugenii). Laboratory Animals, 44(2), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1258/la.2009.009045

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free