4.6 Review

Individual Differences in Social Behavior and Cortical Vasopressin Receptor: Genetics, Epigenetics, and Evolution

Journal

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00537

Keywords

cognitive ecology; balancing selection; enhancer elements; single nucleotide polymorphism; Microtus ochrogaster; neuroendocrinology; monogamy

Categories

Funding

  1. NSF [IOS-1457350, 1355188]
  2. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1355188] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Social behavior is among the most complex and variable of traits. Despite its diversity, we know little about how genetic and developmental factors interact to shape natural variation in social behavior. This review surveys recent work on individual differences in the expression of the vasopressin 1a receptor (V1aR), a major regulator of social behavior, in the neocortex of the socially monogamous prairie vole. V1aR exhibits profound variation in the retrosplenial cortex (RSC), a region critical to spatial and contextual memory. RSC-V1aR abundance is associated with patterns of male space-use and sexual fidelity in the field: males with high RSC-V1aR show high spatial and sexual fidelity to partners, while low RSC-V1aR males are significantly more likely to mate outside the pair-bond. Individual differences in RSC-V1aR are predicted by a set of linked single nucleotide polymorphisms within the avpr1a locus. These alternative alleles have been actively maintained by selection, suggesting that the brain differences represent a balanced polymorphism. Lastly, the alleles occur within regulatory sequences, and result in differential sensitivity to environmental perturbation. Together the data provide insight into how genetic, epigenetic and evolutionary forces interact to shape the social brain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available