An Operant Conditioning Task to Assess the Choice between Wheel Running and Palatable Food in Mice.

Wheel running, especially in the homecage, has been widely used to study the neurobiology of exercise because animal tends to use it voluntarily. However, as for each reward, its consumption (in the present case, running performance) does not specifically provide information on its incentive value, i.e., the extent to which animals are motivated to run independently from their consumption of that reward. This is a major drawback, especially when focusing on the neurobiology governing the pathological imbalances between exercise and e.g., feeding (obesity, anorexia nervosa). Yet, few studies have shown that operant conditioning wherein wheel-running is used as a reinforcer that can be "consumed" after nose-poking or lever-pressing allows to distinguish motivation from consumption. Thus, nose-poking or lever-pressing under a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement in animals trained under fixed ratio reinforcement schedules provides, through the so-called breakpoint, an index of running motivation. As compared to wheel-running, numerous studies have used food as a reinforcer, which helped to uncover the neurobiology of feeding. However, to our knowledge, there is no paradigm allowing the assessment of the choice between running and feeding when presented in concurrence, with the possibility to measure a priori the motivation for each reward. Herein, we describe a protocol that first permits to measure the drive for each of these two rewards before it allows to measure the preference for one over the other in a reward choice setting. This paradigm could help to better characterize the neurobiology underlying pathological imbalances between physical activity and feeding, which is the core feature of eating disorders.