Cited by 197Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 89 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Variation in the Oxytocin Receptor Gene Predicts Brain Region–Specific Expression and Social Attachment

Open access

Abstract

Background Oxytocin (OXT) modulates several aspects of social behavior. Intranasal OXT is a leading candidate for treating social deficits in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and common genetic variants in the human oxytocin receptor (OXTR) are associated with emotion recognition, relationship quality and ASD. Animal models have revealed that individual differences in Oxtr expression in the brain drive social behavior variation. Our understanding of how genetic variation contributes to brain OXTR expression is very limited. Methods We investigated Oxtr expression in monogamous prairie voles, which have a well characterized OXT system. We quantified brain region-specific levels of Oxtr mRNA and OXTR protein with established neuroanatomical methods. We used pyrosequencing to investigate allelic imbalance of Oxtr mRNA, a molecular signature of polymorphic genetic regulatory elements. We performed next-generation sequencing to discover variants in and near the Oxtr gene. We investigated social attachment using the partner preference test. Results Our allelic imbalance data demonstrates that genetic variants contribute to individual differences in Oxtr expression, but only in particular brain regions, including the nucleus accumbens (NAcc), where OXTR signaling facilitates social attachment. Next-generation sequencing identified one polymorphism in the Oxtr intron, near a putative cis-regulatory element, explaining 74% of the variance in striatal Oxtr expression specifically. Males homozygous for the high expressing allele display enhanced social attachment. Discussion Taken together, these findings provide convincing evidence for robust genetic influence on Oxtr expression and provide novel insights into how non-coding polymorphisms in the OXTR might influence individual differences in human social cognition and behavior

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In prairie voles, non-coding variation in the oxytocin receptor gene predicts brain-region-specific Oxtr expression and OXTR density, especially in the nucleus accumbens. An intronic SNP, NT213739, explains at least 74% of the variance in NAcc OXTR density and is associated with mating-induced partner preference formation in males.

Key findings

  • Oxtr allelic imbalance was strongest in striatal regions: in heterozygous voles, the T-allele transcript was 3–5 times more prevalent than the C-allele in NAcc (cDNA ratio 3.16; gDNA threshold 1.11) and CP (cDNA ratio 5.24; gDNA threshold 1.13), with a lesser effect in amygdala (cDNA ratio 1.19; gDNA threshold 1.14).
  • Sequencing 70 kb around Oxtr in 45 voles identified 967 SNPs; 15 SNPs in linkage disequilibrium spanning 30 kb were associated with NAcc OXTR density at P=1.06×10−15, adjusted R²=0.78.
  • The intronic SNP NT213739 was robustly associated with NAcc OXTR density across independent samples (all P-values <4×10−10; adjusted R²≥74%) and with Oxtr mRNA levels; it was not associated with insular cortex OXTR density.
  • In the partner preference test, C/C males spent significantly more time huddling with the partner than the stranger, whereas C/T and T/T males failed to display a partner preference.

Methods

  • Prairie voles from a laboratory breeding colony were used for brain-region-specific measures of Oxtr mRNA and OXTR protein via in situ hybridization and autoradiography, with sample sizes including N=31 for autoradiography and N=31 for in situ hybridization.
  • Allelic imbalance was assayed by pyrosequencing in animals heterozygous for the 3′UTR SNP NT204321 (minor allele frequency 0.33); next-generation sequencing of 70 kb surrounding Oxtr was performed in 45 voles, followed by genotyping of NT213739 in additional samples (n=35 and n=31).
  • Associations between genetic markers and brain data used linear regression with Bonferroni correction, factor analysis for brain-region covariation, and PLINK/SEQ for SNP–autoradiography associations; social attachment was assessed with the partner preference test.

Limitations

  • The paper states that the genotype–phenotype relationships do not implicate NT213739 above other SNPs in perfect LD spanning 30 kb, and that larger samples of more genetically diverse animals, including wild-caught specimens, may be needed to break the haplotype structure and identify the functional SNP.
  • The paper notes that cross-species comparisons of putative regulatory elements should be interpreted cautiously because transcription factor binding sites may differ between species.
  • Evident from the text: the study reports strong associations but does not perform direct functional validation such as ChIP-seq, chromosome conformation capture, or in vitro transcription assays; the behavioral sample size for the partner preference test is not stated in the provided text.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.12.008

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

40 Not checked yet · 26 Own result · 8 Own interpretation · 4 Own method · 1 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 86 references — free account

Show all 45 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 19
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 23
36 of 36
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The neural mechanisms by which non-coding SNPs in OXTR influence behavior have not yet been explored.

    “Despite these many associations with human social behavior and disorders, the neural mechanisms by which non-coding SNPs in the OXTR could influence behaviors has yet to be explored.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Correlations between OXTR densities across brain regions can be explained by unobserved latent variables, possibly reflecting transcriptional processes.

    “We hypothesize that correlations between OXTR densities from different brain regions can be explained by unobserved variables, possibly reflecting transcriptional processes giving rise to the patterns of correlation.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mouse ENCODE signatures of transcriptional activity in the Oxtr region indicate homologous cis-regulatory elements in prairie vole.

    “we investigated their homology with regions of the mouse Oxtr gene that overlap with signatures of functional activity occurring within neural tissues where OXTR is expressed in the mouse (59).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Candidate gene polymorphisms usually explain only 1–10% of behavioral phenotype variance in behavioral genetic studies.

    “Behavioral genetic studies typically report that 1–10% of the variance in behavioral phenotype is explained by candidate gene polymorphisms.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    OXTR density lies closer to genotype than behavior does in biological terms.

    “We presume that OXTR density is biologically more proximate to genotype than behavior”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Behavioral genetic studies usually involve many additional contributors to behavioral variation.

    “and in typical behavioral genetic studies many more variables are contributing to behavioral variation.”
6 of 6

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 86 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
King, L. B., Walum, H., Inoue, K., Eyrich, N. W., & Young, L. J.
Affiliations
Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
Young, Larry J.
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
80
Issue
2
Pages
160-169
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2216755319
Cited by
191
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 19
FWCI
32.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R01MH096983, 1P50MH100023, 5T32GM008605, 5T32DA015040)
  • National Institutes of Health Office of Research Infrastructure Programs/OD (P51OD11132)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Keywords
oxytocin receptor gene, oxytocin receptor, Microtus ochrogaster, social attachment, brain region-specific gene expression, allelic imbalance, cis-regulatory elements, intronic polymorphism, nucleus accumbens, striatum, mate preferences, monogamy, genetic regulation of gene expression, autism spectrum disorder
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Alleles, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Arvicolinae, Individuality, Nucleus Accumbens, Object Attachment, Polymorphism, Genetic, RNA, Messenger, Social Behavior, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Receptors, Oxytocin

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review