Cited by 76Tactile and Sensory InteractionsMultisensory perception and integrationFace Recognition and Perception

The Representation of Social Facial Touch in Rat Barrel Cortex

Open access
Bobrov, Evgeny, Wolfe, Jason, Rao, Rajnish P., Brecht, Michael·2014·Current Biology

Abstract

Controlled presentation of stimuli to anesthetized [1] or awake [2] animals suggested that neurons in sensory cortices respond to elementary features [3, 4], but we know little about neuronal responses evoked by social interactions. Here we investigate processing in the barrel cortex of rats engaging in social facial touch [5, 6]. Sensory stimulation by conspecifics differs from classic whisker stimuli such as deflections, contact poles [7, 8], or textures [9, 10]. A large fraction of barrel cortex neurons responded to facial touch. Social touch responses peaked when animals aligned their faces and contacted each other by multiple whiskers with small, irregular whisker movements. Object touch was associated with larger, more regular whisker movements, and object responses were weaker than social responses. Whisker trimming abolished responses. During social touch, neurons in males increased their firing on average by 44%, while neurons in females increased their firing by only 19%. In females, socially evoked and ongoing firing rates were more than 1.5-fold higher in nonestrus than in estrus. Barrel cortex represented socially different contacts by distinct firing rates, and the variation of activity with sex and sexual status could contribute to the generation of gender-specific neural constructs of conspecifics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.049

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Social touch, as opposed to non-social touch, results in stronger responses from cells within the rodent barrel cortex.

    “Social touch, as opposed to non-social touch, results in stronger responses from cells within the rodent barrel cortex, a division of the primary somatosensory cortex corresponding to processing signals emerging from whiskers [94].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 76

Authors
Bobrov, E., Wolfe, J., Rao, R. P., & Brecht, M.
Affiliations
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Brecht, Michael
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-01
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
109-115
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2073913808
Cited by
76
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
barrel cortex, whisker movement, sex differences, estrous cycle, sexual status, social interaction, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Animal, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Male, Sex Factors, Social Behavior, Touch, Vibrissae, Rats

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.

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