Haller J, Leveleki Cs, Baranyi J, Mikics E, Bakos N
Institute of Experimental Medicine, Budapest, Hungary.
Behav Pharmacol. 2003 Sep;14(5-6):439-46. doi: 10.1097/01.fbp.0000087735.21047.e7.
We investigated the social behavioural effects of a single exposure to either social defeat or electric shocks, using the recently developed social avoidance test in rats. The testing apparatus consisted of two connected chambers, one of which contained an unfamiliar male confined in a sub-chamber by a perforated Plexiglas wall. The subjects were placed in the empty chamber and, after 3 min of habituation, were allowed to explore the apparatus for 5 min. The latency, frequency and duration of visits made to the opponent-containing chamber were recorded. Both stressors reduced the exploration of the opponent-containing chamber for more than 5 days. The effects of electric shocks were not affected by housing conditions, whereas group housing protected rats from the long-term effects of defeat. In addition, the effects of social defeat in isolated rats lasted longer than the effects of electric shocks. These differences suggest that the two stressors have qualitatively different effects and may model different behavioural states in humans. In a second experiment, social avoidance induced by electric shocks was readily abolished by both chlordiazepoxide and buspirone. We suggest that the shock-induced social avoidance paradigm may become a useful model of stress-induced anxiety.
我们使用最近开发的大鼠社会回避测试,研究了单次遭受社会挫败或电击对社会行为的影响。测试装置由两个相连的腔室组成,其中一个腔室里有一只陌生雄性大鼠,被一块有孔的有机玻璃墙限制在一个子腔室内。将实验对象置于空的腔室中,经过3分钟的适应期后,让其在装置中探索5分钟。记录其进入含有对手的腔室的潜伏期、频率和持续时间。两种应激源都会使对含有对手的腔室的探索减少超过5天。电击的影响不受饲养条件的影响,而群居可保护大鼠免受挫败的长期影响。此外,隔离大鼠中社会挫败的影响比电击的影响持续时间更长。这些差异表明,这两种应激源具有质的不同影响,可能模拟人类不同的行为状态。在第二个实验中,氯氮卓和丁螺环酮都能轻易消除电击诱导的社会回避。我们认为,电击诱导的社会回避范式可能成为应激诱导焦虑的有用模型。