The effects of genetic selection for high wheel running (13th generation) and prolonged access (8 weeks) to running wheels on food consumption and body composition were studied in house mice (Mus domesticus). Mice from four replicate lines selected for high wheel-running activity ran over twice as many revolutions per day on activity wheels as did mice from four replicate control lines. At approximately 49 days of age, all mice were placed individually in cages with access to wheels and monitored for 6 days, after which wheels were prevented from rotating for the "sedentary" individuals. During the experiment, five feeding trials were conducted and body mass was measured weekly. After 8 weeks, body composition was measured by hydrogen isotope dilution. Across the five feeding trials, mice in the "active" group (wheels free to rotate) consumed 22.4% more food than mice in the "sedentary" group (wheels locked); mice from the selected lines consumed 8.4% more food than mice from the control lines (average of all trials; body mass-corrected values). In females, but not males, we found a significant interaction between selection and wheel access treatments: within the "active" group the difference in food consumption between selected and control animals was greater than in the "sedentary" group. At the end of the study, mice from the "active" and "sedentary" groups did not differ significantly in body mass; however, mice from the selected lines were approximately 6% smaller in body mass. Estimated lean body mass did not differ significantly either between selected and control lines or between wheel-access groups (P>0.3). Mice from selected lines had lower total body fat compared to mice from control lines (P=0.05; 24.5% reduction; LSMEANS) as did mice from the "active" compared to "sedentary" group (P= 0.03; 29.2% reduction; LSMEANS). Under these conditions, a sufficient explanation for the difference in body mass between the selected and control lines was the difference in fat content.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2010.
All research outputs
#7,654,469
of 28,836,933 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#162
of 860 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,772
of 52,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,836,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 860 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 52,722 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.
