To Play or Not to Play? Effects of Playmate Familiarity and Social Isolation on Social Play Engagement in Three Laboratory Rat Strains.

Isabella C Orsucci, Kira D Becker, Jackson R Ham, Jessica D A Lee, Samantha M Bowden, Alexa H Veenema
Author Information
  1. Isabella C Orsucci: Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
  2. Kira D Becker: Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
  3. Jackson R Ham: Department of Neuroscience, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
  4. Jessica D A Lee: Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
  5. Samantha M Bowden: Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
  6. Alexa H Veenema: Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. ORCID

Abstract

Social play is a motivating and rewarding behavior displayed by juveniles of many mammalian species, including humans and rats. Social play is vital to the development of social skills. Autistic children show less social play engagement which may contribute to their impairments in social skills. There is limited knowledge about what external conditions may positively or negatively influence social play engagement in humans or other animals. Therefore, we determined how two common external conditions, playmate familiarity and social isolation, modulate social play levels and social play defense tactics in juveniles of three common laboratory rat strains: Long-Evans, Sprague-Dawley, and Wistar. Males and females were socially isolated for either 2h or 48h prior to social play testing and were then exposed to either a familiar (cage mate) or novel playmate, creating four testing conditions: 2h-Familiar, 48h-Familiar, 2h-Novel, and 48h-Novel. Both playmate familiarity and social isolation length influenced social play behavior levels and tactics in juvenile rats, but did so differently for each of the three rat strains. Long-Evans played most with a familiar playmate, irrespective of time isolated, Sprague-Dawley played most in the 48h-Familiar condition, and Wistar played the least in the 2h-Familiar condition, but Wistar played more with a novel playmate than Long-Evans and Sprague-Dawley. Analysis of social play tactics by the playmates in response to nape attacks by the experimental rats revealed strain differences with novel playmates. Here, Sprague-Dawley and Wistar defended more nape attacks than Long-Evans. Sprague-Dawley evaded these attacks, thereby shortening body contact. In contrast, Wistar turned to face their playmate attacker and showed more complete rotations, thereby extending body contact and wrestling longer. Role reversals, which increase social play reciprocity and reflect the quality of social play, were higher in Long-Evans and Sprague-Dawley with familiar playmates. Role reversals decreased for Sprague-Dawley but increased for Wistar after 48h isolation. The effects of playmate familiarity or social isolation length on social play levels and tactics were similar across sex for all three strains. In conclusion, we showed that two common external factors (playmate familiarity and social isolation length) that largely vary across social play studies have a major impact on the level and quality of social play in the three rat strains. Strain differences indicate higher level and quality of social play with familiar playmates in Long-Evans, with familiar playmates after short isolation in Sprague-Dawley, and with novel playmates after longer isolation for Wistar. Future research could determine whether strain differences in neuronal mechanisms underlie these condition-induced variations in social play engagement. Our findings are also informative in suggesting that external conditions like playmate familiarity and social isolation length could influence social play levels and social play quality in typical and atypical children.

References

  1. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2018 Sep;43(10):2109-2117 [PMID: 29875448]
  2. Dev Psychobiol. 1981 Jul;14(4):327-32 [PMID: 7250521]
  3. Autism. 2003 Dec;7(4):347-60 [PMID: 14678675]
  4. Dev Psychobiol. 2018 Dec;60(8):903-912 [PMID: 29969514]
  5. Lancet. 1994 Nov 19;344(8934):1398-402 [PMID: 7968076]
  6. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2023 Feb;145:105037 [PMID: 36621585]
  7. Front Behav Neurosci. 2022 Oct 18;16:1033999 [PMID: 36330048]
  8. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1976 Feb;90(2):190-7 [PMID: 1249271]
  9. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014 Feb 28;8:58 [PMID: 24616675]
  10. Neurobiol Stress. 2021 Jun 17;15:100355 [PMID: 34307794]
  11. Physiol Behav. 1981 Mar;26(3):467-72 [PMID: 7195594]
  12. Physiol Behav. 2017 Feb 1;169:147-154 [PMID: 27923716]
  13. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1947 Jan;17(1):40-56 [PMID: 20282040]
  14. Dev Psychobiol. 2008 Dec;50(8):767-76 [PMID: 18846499]
  15. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014 Jun 16;8:216 [PMID: 24982623]
  16. Brain Res. 1986 Nov 29;398(2):324-8 [PMID: 3801906]
  17. Q Rev Biol. 2001 Jun;76(2):141-68 [PMID: 11409050]
  18. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016 Nov;70:86-105 [PMID: 27587003]
  19. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1999 Aug;24(6):639-56 [PMID: 10399773]
  20. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2022 Jul;239(7):2093-2108 [PMID: 35230469]
  21. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015 Jun;56:35-44 [PMID: 25800147]
  22. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007 Jul;37(6):1192-6 [PMID: 17063401]
  23. Exp Clin Endocrinol. 1991;98(2):111-21 [PMID: 1778225]
  24. PLoS One. 2016 Jun 28;11(6):e0158150 [PMID: 27351457]
  25. Pediatrics. 2007 Jan;119(1):182-91 [PMID: 17200287]
  26. Neuropharmacology. 1989 Apr;28(4):411-8 [PMID: 2546087]
  27. Neuroendocrinology. 1988 Dec;48(6):650-7 [PMID: 2855106]
  28. Pediatrics. 2018 Sep;142(3): [PMID: 30126932]
  29. Front Pharmacol. 2021 Mar 30;12:646088 [PMID: 33859565]
  30. J Neuroendocrinol. 2015 Oct;27(10):752-64 [PMID: 26212131]
  31. Behav Brain Res. 2023 Feb 15;439:114222 [PMID: 36427590]
  32. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2010 Oct;31(10):463-9 [PMID: 20684996]
  33. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Jan 07;22(2): [PMID: 33430368]
  34. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1997 May;21(3):309-26 [PMID: 9168267]
  35. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2009 Apr;34(3):463-7 [PMID: 19056182]
  36. J Comp Psychol. 2006 Feb;120(1):19-30 [PMID: 16551161]
  37. Arch Sex Behav. 2002 Feb;31(1):17-26 [PMID: 11910788]
  38. Am Psychol. 1968 Oct;23(10):734-42 [PMID: 5682832]
  39. J Comp Psychol. 2014 Aug;128(3):318-27 [PMID: 24749500]
  40. Horm Behav. 2017 Jan;87:137-144 [PMID: 27884596]
  41. Neuroscience. 2015 Oct 29;307:117-27 [PMID: 26318330]
  42. J Autism Dev Disord. 1993 Sep;23(3):467-89 [PMID: 8226582]
  43. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007 May;16(2):57-66 [PMID: 18392153]
  44. Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 11;14(1):16056 [PMID: 38992171]
  45. Horm Behav. 2024 Jul;163:105563 [PMID: 38772158]
  46. Neuroscience. 2020 Sep 15;444:9-18 [PMID: 32763285]
  47. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2014 Apr;231(8):1661-73 [PMID: 24221828]
  48. Front Behav Neurosci. 2016 Oct 20;10:203 [PMID: 27812328]
  49. Brain Res. 2020 Apr 1;1732:146675 [PMID: 31978376]
  50. Front Behav Neurosci. 2024 Aug 27;18:1451283 [PMID: 39257567]
  51. J Exp Anal Behav. 2021 May;115(3):634-649 [PMID: 33713441]
  52. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1992 Jun;20(3):289-302 [PMID: 1619135]
  53. Physiol Behav. 1995 Jul;58(1):119-23 [PMID: 7667408]
  54. Brain. 2018 Sep 1;141(9):2795-2805 [PMID: 30016410]
  55. Behav Neural Biol. 1980 Oct;30(2):197-206 [PMID: 7447871]
  56. J Vis Exp. 2013 Jan 18;(71):e4288 [PMID: 23353923]
  57. J Comp Psychol. 2013 Nov;127(4):453-64 [PMID: 23815592]
  58. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 Dec;95:421-429 [PMID: 30273634]
  59. J Neurosci. 2008 Jul 9;28(28):7137-42 [PMID: 18614683]
  60. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1995 Jan;117(2):225-31 [PMID: 7753971]
  61. Endocrinology. 2005 Sep;146(9):3705-12 [PMID: 15919740]
  62. Physiol Behav. 1978 Feb;20(2):113-5 [PMID: 662934]
  63. Front Behav Neurosci. 2023 Jan 23;16:1076765 [PMID: 36755666]
  64. Behav Processes. 2023 Oct;212:104933 [PMID: 37643663]
  65. Dev Psychobiol. 2024 Feb;66(2):e22456 [PMID: 38388195]
  66. Front Behav Neurosci. 2021 Apr 13;15:648830 [PMID: 33927601]
  67. Behav Neurosci. 2014 Apr;128(2):178-86 [PMID: 24773437]
  68. J Neurosci Methods. 2018 Apr 15;300:20-25 [PMID: 28502554]
  69. Neuroendocrinology. 1983 Aug;37(2):85-90 [PMID: 6888663]
  70. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020 Nov;45(12):2012-2019 [PMID: 32506112]
  71. Dev Psychobiol. 1997 Nov;31(3):193-205 [PMID: 9386921]
  72. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2018 Mar;89:59-68 [PMID: 29331800]
  73. Physiol Behav. 1992 Apr;51(4):667-72 [PMID: 1594664]
  74. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2008 Jul;18(7):519-30 [PMID: 18434104]
  75. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011 Oct;35(9):1821-30 [PMID: 21414353]
  76. J Autism Child Schizophr. 1975 Dec;5(4):363-71 [PMID: 1243138]
  77. Dis Model Mech. 2018 Jun 20;11(6): [PMID: 29739816]
  78. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1947 May;33(5):109-17 [PMID: 16578253]
  79. Schizophr Bull. 2000;26(1):217-32 [PMID: 10755683]
  80. Physiol Behav. 1983 Mar;30(3):341-7 [PMID: 6223327]
  81. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013 Nov;38(11):2554-61 [PMID: 23838102]
  82. Behav Neurosci. 2007 Feb;121(1):164-76 [PMID: 17324061]
  83. Endocrinology. 2010 Mar;151(3):1212-20 [PMID: 20051490]
  84. Dev Psychobiol. 1992 May;25(4):261-74 [PMID: 1624056]
  85. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;14(2):83-94 [PMID: 15793687]
  86. Dev Psychobiol. 2003 Jan;42(1):35-43 [PMID: 12471634]
  87. Int J Play. 2020;9(1):58-75 [PMID: 33717644]
  88. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2016 May;91(2):311-27 [PMID: 25619897]
  89. Biol Sex Differ. 2015 Sep 10;6:16 [PMID: 26361539]

Grants

  1. R01 MH125806/NIMH NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0socialplayplaymateisolationSprague-DawleyWistarLong-EvansplaymatesfamiliarityfamiliarSocialexternallevelstacticsthreenovellengthplayedqualityratsengagementconditionscommonratstrainsattacksdifferencesbehaviorjuvenileshumansskillschildrenmayinfluencetwoisolatedeither48htesting2h-Familiar48h-FamiliarconditionnapestraintherebybodycontactshowedlongerRolereversalshigheracrosslevelPlaymotivatingrewardingdisplayedmanymammalianspeciesincludingvitaldevelopmentAutisticshowlesscontributeimpairmentslimitedknowledgepositivelynegativelyanimalsThereforedeterminedmodulatedefenselaboratorystrains:Malesfemalessocially2hpriorexposedcagematecreatingfourconditions:2h-Novel48h-NovelinfluencedjuveniledifferentlyirrespectivetimeleastAnalysisresponseexperimentalrevealeddefendedevadedshorteningcontrastturnedfaceattackercompleterotationsextendingwrestlingincreasereciprocityreflectdecreasedincreasedeffectssimilarsexconclusionfactorslargelyvarystudiesmajorimpactStrainindicateshortFutureresearchdeterminewhetherneuronalmechanismsunderliecondition-inducedvariationsfindingsalsoinformativesuggestingliketypicalatypicalPlay?EffectsPlaymateFamiliarityIsolationEngagementThreeLaboratoryRatStrains

Similar Articles

Cited By