The
Effect of Caffeine on the Wheel Running Activity of Mus musculus
Erinne Sonnenberg
Liann Liegler
Abstract
Six Mus musculus, commonly known as house
mice, were tested to see if caffeine affected activity level. Each mouse was tested in their normal state
(no caffeine) and after consumption of caffeine. The tests were quantified by running wheel
revolutions. The tests were conducted at
the same time on different days to avoid wheel habituation and activity level
variances because of the time of day. We
hypothesized the wheel running activity of the mouse would increase after
caffeine consumption. Our hypothesis was
supported with a p-value of 0.0104.
The caffeine consumption correlated with the wheel rotations on a linear
scale of 0.742.
Keywords: Mus musculus, caffeine, wheel running.
Introduction
Caffeine can affect many different parts of the body.
Caffeine is a stimulant that is often used by people to stay awake. Often times
if a person consumes too much caffeine they have a high amount of energy and
sometimes even feel jittery. Caffeine affects humans by blocking the adenosine
receptors. It can often times make
people feel like they have more energy.
Scientists at the American Physiological Society did studies to
determine caffeine and the effects it has on muscle metabolism. They used human
test subjects for their studies. They gave their subjects nine milligrams for
every kilogram the weighed, this ensured that all the subjects were given
proportionally the same amount of caffeine. They then allowed them to cycle (ride
a stationary bike) until they reached exhaustion, which they defined as eighty-percent
oxygen uptake. The control group did not
consume caffeine and were instructed to ride the same stationary bike until
they reached the same amount of oxygen uptake.They also kept track of how long
each rider rode on the bike, so that they were able to quantify which group on
average rode longer. The scientists concluded the group that was given caffeine
cycled significantly longer than the group without caffeine. The caffeinated
group cycled for, on average, 96.2 minutes and the control group for only 75.8
minutes (Spriet, et. al. 1992).
Caffeine can have
similar effects on animals. Scientists have looked at how caffeine can affect
the house mouse, Mus musculus. Scientists in
Methods
This experiment was performed on two different days at
11:00 a.m. in room TL212 at
Results
We found the average wheel rotations for mice who had
consumed caffeine was 273.5 with a standard deviation of 32.57. When the mice were tested in their natural
state the average wheel revolutions were 167.7 with a standard deviation of
53.31. (Figure 1). We used a 2-tailed paired T-test to find the
p-value of 0.0104. From this we can
conclude that our results were significant and our hypothesis was supported. We also observed the amount of the caffeine
mixture consumption in comparison to the wheel rotations. We used a linear trend line to find the
positive correlation of 0.8109.
Figure
1. Comparison of average wheel
revolutions of Mus musculus after
caffeine consumption and in natural state.
Mean +/- standard error.

Figure
2. Correlation of wheel rotations with amount of caffeine and peanut butter
consumed. Linear trend line used for
R2 value.
Discussion
From the results of this experiment we can infer that
caffeine does have an effect on the activity of small mammals, at least in the
short term. To continue this experiment
we could test to see how long increased energy was present after caffeine
consumption. It would be interesting to
see if there is a correlation between the time the caffeine took effect and
wheel running as time progressed. How
fast does the caffeine wear off and what are the ending results? Do the mice end with less wheel running than
if they had not consumed caffeine? If so
is the wheel activity similar but spaced differently?
When considering future experiments based on these follow
up questions it might be beneficial to use a larger sample size. For this experiment we used 6 mice which is
the very minimum to statistically test.
Using a larger sample size would give us more representative results.
Some possible factors that may have an effect on our data
include the food consumption of the mice.
When food is not available to mice there is a reduction in physical
activity and play (Barber, 1991). If the
opposite is true then increased food would also lead to more energy for
physical activity and play.
As
an incentive for the mouse to ingest the caffeine it was mixed with peanut
butter. The peanut butter itself may
have been the cause for the increased wheel running activity. If we were to repeat this experiment we would
give the mice peanut butter with no caffeine before running them.
Some
studies suggest that wheel running in itself is a rewarding behavior for mice
(Gammie, et. al. 2003). These mice were
not given any opportunities to use the running wheel except during the
experimental procedure. They may have
had an increased activity because of the rare opportunity. It may be beneficial to habituate the mice to
the wheel before testing them.
After
our experiment was complete we considered the possibility that we actually
habituated the mice to the wheel during the first experimental period which
could have affected the activity during the second experimental period. If we were to repeat this experiment we would
change the order of the tests. In the
first session we would give half the mice caffeine and half would get no
caffeine. We would then do the same
thing for the second experimental period giving caffeine to the mice that had
not previously had it and the mice that previously had caffeine would not get
it. Doing this would eliminate the
confounding variable of previous wheel experience. This would also be beneficial if an unknown
change occurred with the mice between the two tests. Confounding variables such as illness, change
in food, or change in any other environmental factor between the two
tests could have altered the results. If
we were to vary the test order these variables would not have an effect on our
results.
Literature Cited
Barber,
N. (1991). Play and Energy Regulation in
Mammals. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 66, 2. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from JSTOR database.
Gammie,
S., Hasen, N., Rhodes, J., Girard,
Spriet,
L., MacLean, D., Dyck, D., Hultman, E., & Cederblad, G. (1992). Caffeine
ingestion and muscle metabolism during prolonged exercise in humans. AJP -
Endocrinology and Metabolism, 262, Retrieved March 31, 2009 from: http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/262/6/E891
Yacoubi,
M., Ledent, C., Ménard, J., Parmentier, M., & Costentin, J. (2000). The
stimulant effects of caffeine on locomotor behaviour in mice are mediated
through its blockade of adenosine A2A receptors. British Journal of
Pharmacology, 129, Retrieved March 31, 2009 from:http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v129/n7/pdf/0703170a.pdf