LAUSR

HIGHLIGHTS3xTg‐AD mice have comparable interval timing performance to wild‐type mice.Sex differences were observed in measures of motivation.Female mice started their timed anticipatory responding later than male mice. ABSTRACT We investigated interval timing behavior of 10‐month‐old male and female 3xTg‐AD mice compared with their B6129F2/J wild type controls using the peak interval procedure with a 15 s target interval. Multiple parameters reflecting different aspects of timing performance were extracted from steady‐state anticipatory nose‐poking behavior using two different approaches: single trial analyses and average response curve analyses. These measures can dissociate the differences in performance due to distortions in the interval timing ability or to motivational decline (i.e. apathy); both of which have been reported in Alzheimer patients. We found that the interval timing ability of male and female 3xTg‐AD mice did not differ from wild‐type controls. However, in measures reflecting motivational state, we found significant sex differences regardless of genotype. Specifically, female mice initiated anticipatory responding later in the trial and had lower response amplitudes than males. Although our findings can also be interpreted in terms of differences in temporal control for response initiation, they more strongly suggest the effect of differential incentive motivation between sexes on timing behavior in these mice.