CBA/CaJ mouse ultrasonic vocalizations depend on prior social experience.

Kali Burke, Laurel A Screven, Micheal L Dent
Author Information
  1. Kali Burke: Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, New York, United States of America.
  2. Laurel A Screven: Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, New York, United States of America.
  3. Micheal L Dent: Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, New York, United States of America. ORCID

Abstract

Mouse ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs) have variable spectrotemporal features, which researchers use to parse them into different categories. USVs may be important for communication, but it is unclear whether the categories that researchers have developed are relevant to the mice. Instead, other properties such as the number, rate, peak frequency, or bandwidth of the vocalizations may be important cues that the mice are using to interpret the nature of the social interaction. To investigate this, a comprehensive catalog of the USVs that mice are producing across different social contexts must be created. Forty male and female adult CBA/CaJ mice were recorded in isolation for five minutes following either a one-hour period of isolation or an exposure to a same- or opposite-sex Mouse. Vocalizations were separated into nine categories based on the frequency composition of each USV. Additionally, USVs were quantified based on the bandwidth, duration, peak frequency, total number, and proportion of vocalizations produced. Results indicate that mice differentially produce their vocalizations across social encounters. There were significant differences in the number of USVs that mice produce across exposure conditions, the proportional probability of producing the different categories of USVs across sex and conditions, and the features of the USVs across conditions. In sum, there are sex-specific differences in production of USVs by laboratory mice, and prior social experiences matter for vocalization production. Furthermore, this study provides critical evidence that female mice probably produce vocalizations in opposite-sex interactions, which is important because this is an often overlooked variable in Mouse communication research.

References

  1. PLoS One. 2014 Jan 09;9(1):e85405 [PMID: 24416405]
  2. PLoS One. 2014 May 09;9(5):e97244 [PMID: 24816836]
  3. PLoS One. 2015 Aug 26;10(8):e0134123 [PMID: 26309246]
  4. Curr Biol. 2016 Oct 10;26(19):R880-R881 [PMID: 27728788]
  5. Anim Behav. 1972 Feb;20(1):88-100 [PMID: 4677167]
  6. Behav Biol. 1972 Dec;7(6):805-14 [PMID: 4655399]
  7. Behav Brain Res. 2007 Sep 4;182(2):223-30 [PMID: 17336405]
  8. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1977 Dec;91(6):1424-31 [PMID: 599200]
  9. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35538 [PMID: 22514749]
  10. PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e22093 [PMID: 21818297]
  11. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2016 Jun;38:1-5 [PMID: 26789140]
  12. Physiol Behav. 1998 Feb 15;63(4):467-73 [PMID: 9523885]
  13. Physiol Behav. 1984 May;32(5):717-21 [PMID: 6494276]
  14. Physiol Behav. 2012 Feb 1;105(3):766-71 [PMID: 22037196]
  15. Behav Biol. 1976 Oct;18(2):285-9 [PMID: 999582]
  16. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29401 [PMID: 22238608]
  17. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Dec 10;9:316 [PMID: 26696847]
  18. PLoS One. 2010 Apr 01;5(4):e9705 [PMID: 20368980]
  19. Neuroscience. 2009 Aug 18;162(2):486-500 [PMID: 19401221]
  20. J Neurosci. 2013 Mar 27;33(13):5573-83 [PMID: 23536072]
  21. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1973 Sep;84(3):445-52 [PMID: 4745813]
  22. PLoS One. 2011 Mar 09;6(3):e17460 [PMID: 21408007]
  23. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41133 [PMID: 22815941]
  24. Front Syst Neurosci. 2015 Dec 16;9:172 [PMID: 26733824]
  25. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 05;9(2):e87186 [PMID: 24505280]
  26. Genes Brain Behav. 2011 Feb;10(1):28-34 [PMID: 20345895]
  27. PLoS One. 2008 Aug 27;3(8):e3067 [PMID: 18728777]
  28. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016 Jun;65:313-25 [PMID: 27060755]
  29. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2007 Jan;46(1):28-34 [PMID: 17203913]
  30. Horm Behav. 1986 Mar;20(1):60-72 [PMID: 3957260]
  31. PLoS One. 2008 Apr 02;3(4):e1893 [PMID: 18382674]
  32. Anim Behav. 2000 Nov;60(5):689-694 [PMID: 11082239]
  33. Physiol Behav. 2009 Mar 23;96(4-5):602-5 [PMID: 19150619]
  34. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40782 [PMID: 22815817]
  35. Front Behav Neurosci. 2013 Nov 19;7:159 [PMID: 24312027]
  36. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014 Nov 18;8:399 [PMID: 25477796]
  37. PLoS One. 2016 Feb 03;11(2):e0147102 [PMID: 26841117]
  38. J Comp Psychol. 1985 Dec;99(4):420-36 [PMID: 4075780]
  39. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Dec;114(6 Pt 1):3412-22 [PMID: 14714820]
  40. Elife. 2015 May 28;4:null [PMID: 26020291]
  41. PLoS One. 2011 Mar 09;6(3):e17721 [PMID: 21408017]

Grants

  1. R01 DC012302/NIDCD NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Animals
Behavior, Animal
Female
Male
Mice
Mice, Inbred CBA
Sex Factors
Ultrasonics
Vocalization, Animal

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0USVsmicevocalizationssocialacrosscategoriesdifferentimportantnumberfrequencymouseproduceconditionsultrasonicvariablefeaturesresearchersmaycommunicationpeakbandwidthproducingfemaleCBA/CaJisolationexposureopposite-sexbaseddifferencesproductionpriorMousespectrotemporaluseparseunclearwhetherdevelopedrelevantInsteadpropertiesratecuesusinginterpretnatureinteractioninvestigatecomprehensivecatalogcontextsmustcreatedFortymaleadultrecordedfiveminutesfollowingeitherone-hourperiodsame-VocalizationsseparatedninecompositionUSVAdditionallyquantifieddurationtotalproportionproducedResultsindicatedifferentiallyencounterssignificantproportionalprobabilitysexsumsex-specificlaboratoryexperiencesmattervocalizationFurthermorestudyprovidescriticalevidenceprobablyinteractionsoftenoverlookedresearchdependexperience

Similar Articles

Cited By (20)