4.5 Article

Sex and repeated restraint stress interact to affect cat odor-induced defensive behavior in adult rats

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 1027, Issue 1-2, Pages 161-172

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2004.08.056

Keywords

predator odor; defensive behavior; sex difference; repeated stress

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The overall objective of the present experiment was to assess sex differences in the effects of repeated restraint stress on fear-induced defensive behavior and general emotional behavior. Groups of male and female Long-Evans rats received either daily restraint stress (stressed) or daily brief handling (nonstressed) for 21 consecutive days. On days 22-25, a number of behavioral tests were administered concluding with a test of defensive behavior in response to a predatory odor. Stressed and nonstressed males and females were exposed to a piece of cat collar previously worn by a female domestic cat (cat odor) or a piece of collar never worn by a cat (control odor) in a familiar open field containing a hide barrier. Rats displayed pronounced defensive behavior (increased hiding and risk assessment) and decreased nondefensive behavior (grooming, rearing) in response to the cat odor. Nonstressed females exposed to cat odor displayed less risk assessment behavior relative to nonstressed males exposed to cat odor. Restraint stress had little effect on defensive behavior in male rats but significantly increased risk assessment behaviors in females. Behavior on the Porsolt forced swim test (a measure of depression-like behavior) and the open field test (a measure of anxiety-like behavior) was not affected by stress or sex. These findings indicate the utility of the predator odor paradigm in detecting subtle shifts in naturally occurring anxiety-like behaviors that may occur differentially in males and females. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available