4.2 Article

Experience restores innate female preference for male ultrasonic vocalizations

期刊

GENES BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 28-34

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-183X.2010.00580.x

关键词

courtship behavior; female preference; mating behavior; mice; ultrasonic vocalizations

资金

  1. Tamara Ivanova for mouse husbandry
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01 DC008343, T32 GM008605]
  3. National Science Foundation's Center for Behavioral Neuroscience [IBN-9876754]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mouse models are increasingly contributing to our understanding of the neural genetics of sensory processing and memory. For example, strain differences have helped elucidate basic mechanisms of age-related hearing loss and auditory fear conditioning. Assessing sensory differences arising in acoustic communication contexts is also important for understanding natural audition. While this topic has not been well studied, it is currently being addressed through auditory neuroethological studies in the CBA/CaJ strain, where insights will help lay a foundation for future neural genetic studies. Here, we focus on the responses of adult females to ultrasonic vocalizations of males. We tested a group of female mice in a place-preference paradigm before and after auditory and olfactory experience with a male. A control group was housed with other female cagemates between trials. All females showed an initial preference for male calls that rapidly decayed over the course of a trial. However, only females that had been pair-housed with a male during the inter-trial interval displayed a reinstated interest in male vocalizations, suggesting possible group differences in the assessment of the calls' behavioral relevance. These findings provide a timeframe during which auditory processing of male ultrasounds might be expected to show a difference depending on behavioral relevance, and also suggest an importance of social interactions in maintaining call recognition.

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

4.2
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