Cargando…

Dyadic social interaction of C57BL/6 mice versus interaction with a toy mouse: conditioned place preference/aversion, substrain differences, and no development of a hierarchy

Impaired social interaction is a hallmark symptom of many psychiatric diseases, including dependence syndromes (substance use disorders). Helping the addict reorient her/his behavior away from the drug of abuse toward social interaction would be of considerable therapeutic benefit. To study the neur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pinheiro, Barbara S., Seidl, Simon S., Habazettl, Eva, Gruber, Bernadette E., Bregolin, Tanja, Zernig, Gerald
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4780246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26905190
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/FBP.0000000000000223
Descripción
Sumario:Impaired social interaction is a hallmark symptom of many psychiatric diseases, including dependence syndromes (substance use disorders). Helping the addict reorient her/his behavior away from the drug of abuse toward social interaction would be of considerable therapeutic benefit. To study the neural basis of such a reorientation, we have developed several animal models in which the attractiveness of a dyadic (i.e. one-to-one) social interaction (DSI) can be compared directly with that of cocaine as a prototypical drug of abuse. Our models are based on the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm. In an ongoing effort to validate our experimental paradigms in C57BL/6 mice to make use of the plethora of transgenic models available in this genus, we found the following: (a) DSI with a live mouse produced CPP, whereas an interaction with an inanimate mouse-like object (i.e. a ‘toy mouse’; toy mouse interaction) led to conditioned place aversion – but only in the Jackson substrain (C57BL/6J). (b) In the NIH substrain (C57BL/6N), both DSI and toy mouse interaction produced individual aversion in more than 50% of the tested mice. (c) Four 15 min DSI episodes did not result in the development of an observable hierarchy, that is, dominance/subordination behavior in the overwhelming majority (i.e. 30 of 32) of the tested Jackson mouse pairs. Therefore, dominance/subordination does not seem to be a confounding variable in our paradigm, at least not in C57BL/6J mice. Respective data for NIH mice were too limited to allow any conclusion. The present findings indicate that (a) DSI with a live mouse produces CPP to a greater degree than an interaction with an inanimate object resembling a mouse and that (b) certain substrain differences with respect to CPP/aversion to DSI do exist between the Jax and NIH substrain of C57BL/6 mice. These differences have to be considered when choosing a proper mouse substrain model for investigating the neural basis of DSI reward versus drug reward.