4.5 Article

The effects of sex, age and commensal way of life on levels of fecal glucocorticoid metabolites in spiny mice (Acomys cahirinus)

期刊

PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR
卷 95, 期 1-2, 页码 187-193

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.05.017

关键词

social stress; glucocorticoids; non-invasive monitoring; feces; adrenocortical activity; commensalisms; sociality; mating systems; rodents; welfare

资金

  1. Agency of the Czech Republic [206/05/2655, 2061 05/H012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We studied levels of fecal glucocorticoid metabolites (GCM) in a social rodent - Egyptian spiny mouse. As breeding adults are socially dominant over subadults, and adolescent males are driven away by the dominant males, we addressed the question whether animals within extended families are stressed differently depending upon their social category. In addition, we evaluated whether there are differences between non-commensal (outdoor) and commensal (adapted to human settlements) populations. Concentrations of fecal GCM were assessed from samples collected in a special cage that allowed continuous individual sampling of undisturbed mice housed as a semi-natural social unit. First we performed an ACTH challenge test to validate two enzyme immunoassays (EIA): a 5 alpha-pregnane-3 beta,11 beta,21-triol-20-one EIA and an 11-oxoetiocholanolone EIA to measure a group of fecal GCM in this species. Next we monitored concentrations of fecal GCM in 68 individuals belonging to 10 family groups and two populations. Commensal spiny mice showed higher fecal GCM levels than non-commensal ones. No effect of age (i.e., social dominance) and only a small effect of sex (in the commensal population only, with males exhibiting lower values) on fecal GCM levels were found. On the other hand, considerable variations in measured fecal GCM between family groups were revealed, indicating that the social settings of the particular group play an important role. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据