OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience
2020;14 155.

Physiological and Behavioral Responses to Vocalization Playback in Mice.

Alexandra C Niemczura, Jasmine M Grimsley, Chae Kim, Ahmad Alkhawaga, Austin Poth, Alyssa Carvalho, Jeffrey J Wenstrup
Author Information
  1. Alexandra C Niemczura: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  2. Jasmine M Grimsley: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  3. Chae Kim: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  4. Ahmad Alkhawaga: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  5. Austin Poth: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  6. Alyssa Carvalho: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
  7. Jeffrey J Wenstrup: Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH, United States.
PMID: 33033474 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2020.00155

Abstract

In mice, the caller's production of social vocalizations has been extensively studied but the effect of these vocalizations on the listener is less understood, with playback studies to date utilizing one vocalization category or listeners of one sex. This study examines how several categories of mouse vocalizations affect listeners of both sexes to better understand the communicative functions of these vocal categories. We examined physiological and behavioral responses of male and female CBA/CaJ mice to playback of four social vocalization categories: ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs), low-frequency harmonic calls, mid-frequency vocalizations, and noisy calls. Based on the conditions under which these calls are emitted, we hypothesized that playback of these vocal categories would have differential effects on the listeners. In females, playback of all four vocalization categories increased stress hormone levels (corticosterone), but only the non-USV categories increased corticosterone in males. The magnitude of corticosterone increase in non-USV trials was greater in females than in males. In open field tests, all four vocal categories decreased central ambulation in males and females, indicating an increase in anxiety-related behavior. Further, we found that the proportions of USVs emitted by subjects, but not their overall calling rates, were affected by playback of some vocal categories, suggesting that vocalization categories have different communication content. These results show that, even in the absence of behavioral and acoustic contextual features, each vocal category evokes physiological and behavioral responses in mice, with some differences in responses as a function of the listener's sex and playback signal. These findings suggest that at least some of the vocal categories have distinct communicative functions.

Keywords

anxiety communication corticosterone low frequency mouse stress ultrasonic vocalization

References

PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44550 [PMID: 22970247]
Nature. 2020 Feb;578(7793):137-141 [PMID: 31996852]
Behav Brain Res. 2007 Sep 4;182(2):223-30 [PMID: 17336405]
J Neurophysiol. 2016 Apr;115(4):1786-96 [PMID: 26792882]
Physiol Behav. 1983 Jul;31(1):91-6 [PMID: 6685321]
J Neurosci. 2013 Oct 30;33(44):17538-48 [PMID: 24174686]
J Vis Exp. 2015 Feb 06;(96):e52434 [PMID: 25742564]
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2009 Apr;33(4):508-15 [PMID: 18771687]
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2008 Jan;47(1):8-10 [PMID: 18210991]
J Neurophysiol. 2016 Feb 1;115(2):868-86 [PMID: 26538612]
Biol Lett. 2009 Oct 23;5(5):589-92 [PMID: 19515648]
Psychol Bull. 2002 Nov;128(6):961-77 [PMID: 12405139]
Genes Brain Behav. 2016 Feb;15(2):243-59 [PMID: 26566793]
Genes Brain Behav. 2011 Feb;10(1):35-43 [PMID: 20345893]
Elife. 2015 May 28;4: [PMID: 26020291]
Stress. 2017 Sep;20(5):476-494 [PMID: 28859530]
PLoS One. 2009;4(2):e4387 [PMID: 19209221]
Horm Behav. 2000 Sep;38(2):102-10 [PMID: 10964524]
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35538 [PMID: 22514749]
Endocrinology. 1961 May;68:818-24 [PMID: 13756461]
Behav Neural Biol. 1983 Sep;39(1):128-34 [PMID: 6661142]
J Neurophysiol. 2015 Apr 1;113(7):2900-20 [PMID: 25695649]
Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 7;7(1):3017 [PMID: 28592832]
Horm Behav. 1994 Dec;28(4):464-76 [PMID: 7729815]
PLoS Biol. 2005 Dec;3(12):e386 [PMID: 16248680]
Neurosci Lett. 2008 Apr 11;435(1):17-23 [PMID: 18328625]
Horm Behav. 2017 Aug;94:53-60 [PMID: 28645693]
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2007 Jan;46(1):28-34 [PMID: 17203913]
Front Behav Neurosci. 2016 Mar 09;10:38 [PMID: 27014000]
Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Apr 01;9:76 [PMID: 25883559]
Behav Brain Res. 2002 Aug 21;134(1-2):49-57 [PMID: 12191791]
J Comp Psychol. 1985 Dec;99(4):420-36 [PMID: 4075780]
Am J Physiol. 1963 Nov;205(5):807-15 [PMID: 4291060]
Physiol Behav. 2014 Jun 22;133:30-8 [PMID: 24832050]
Naturwissenschaften. 2004 Aug;91(8):381-5 [PMID: 15278217]
Nat Neurosci. 2020 Mar;23(3):411-422 [PMID: 32066980]
Brain Res. 2012 Feb 23;1439:7-14 [PMID: 22265702]
Cell Tissue Res. 2013 Oct;354(1):81-97 [PMID: 23576070]
PLoS One. 2011 Mar 09;6(3):e17460 [PMID: 21408007]
J Comp Psychol. 2008 Nov;122(4):357-67 [PMID: 19014259]
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2010 Dec;11(4):605-23 [PMID: 20706857]
Science. 2004 Jul 16;305(5682):404-7 [PMID: 15256672]
J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Dec;114(6 Pt 1):3412-22 [PMID: 14714820]
Hear Res. 2013 Nov;305:19-30 [PMID: 23665125]
Behav Brain Res. 2016 Sep 1;310:76-83 [PMID: 27142239]
PLoS One. 2008 Apr 02;3(4):e1893 [PMID: 18382674]
PLoS One. 2008 Aug 27;3(8):e3067 [PMID: 18728777]
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40782 [PMID: 22815817]
Genes Brain Behav. 2011 Feb;10(1):4-16 [PMID: 20497235]

Grants

  1. R01 DC000937/NIDCD NIH HHS
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Similar Articles

Cited By