CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorRegulation of Appetite and Obesity

Wistar rats and C57BL/6 mice differ in their motivation to seek social interaction versus food in the Social versus Food Preference Test

Open access
Reppucci, Christina J., Brown, Leigha A., Chambers, Ashley Q., Veenema, Alexa H.·2020·Physiology & Behavior
DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113162PMC PMC7655716

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Here we characterized the Social versus Food Preference Test, a behavioral paradigm designed to investigate the competition between the choice to seek social interaction versus the choice to seek food. We assessed how this competition was modulated by internal cues (social isolation, food deprivation), external cues (stimulus salience), sex (males, females), age (adolescents, adults), and rodent model (Wistar rats, C57BL/6 mice). We found that changes in stimulus preference in response to the internal and external cue manipulations were similar across cohorts. Specifically, social over food preference scores were reduced by food deprivation and social familiarly in Wistar rats and C57BL/6 mice of both sexes. Interestingly, the degree of food deprivation-induced changes in stimulus investigation patterns were greater in adolescents compared to adults in Wistar rats and C57BL/6 mice. Strikingly, baseline stimulus preference and investigation times varied greatly between rodent models: across manipulations, Wistar rats were generally more social-preferring and C57BL/6 mice were generally more food-preferring. Adolescent Wistar rats spent more time investigating the social and food stimuli than adult Wistar rats, while adolescent and adult C57BL/6 mice investigated the stimuli a similar amount. Social isolation did not alter behavior in the Social versus Food Preference Test. Together, our results indicate that the Social versus Food Preference Test is a flexible behavioral paradigm suitable for future interrogations of the peripheral and central systems that can coordinate the expression of stimulus preference related to multiple motivated behaviors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113162

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Attempts to explain the neural mechanisms associated with individual differences in rough-and-tumble play have started to emerge in the literature.

    “However, attempts to explain the neural mechanisms associated with individual differences in RTP have started to emerge in the literature (e.g., Reppucci et al., 2020).”

    From The rough-and-tumble play of rats as a natural behavior suitable for studying the social brain (2022) · cites this paper as Reppucci et al., 2020

    The Discussion (no page available) says neural mechanisms underlying motivated social behavior can differ between males and females and cites studies of juvenile social play. But this paper tests social-versus-food preference, not the neural mechanisms behind individual differences in rough-and-tumble play; its methods say playful behaviors were not observed during the test. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. [2]Berridge KC 2004 Motivation concepts in behavioral neuroscience. Physiol Behav. 81(2), 179– 209. DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2004.02.004 15159167 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]Burnett CJ, Li C, Webber E, Tsaousidou E, Xue SY, Bruning JC, & Krashes MJ 2016 Hunger-driven motivational state competition. Neuron. 92(1), 187– 201. DOl: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.08.032 27693254 PMC5082717 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [4]Padilla SL, Qiu J, Soden ME, Sanz E, Nestor CC, Barker FD, … Palmiter RD 2016 Agouti-related peptide neural circuits mediate adaptive behaviors in the starved state. Nat Neurosci. 19(5), 734– 741. DOI: 10.1038/nn.4274 27019015 PMC4846501 · DOI
  4. [5]Jennings JH, Kim CK, Marshel JH, Raffiee M, Ye L, Quirin S, … Deisseroth K 2019 Interacting neural ensembles in orbitofrontal cortex for social and feeding behaviour. Nature. 565(7741), 645– 649. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0866-8 30651638 PMC6447429 · DOI
  5. [6]Yoest KE, Cummings JA, & Becker JB 2019 Ovarian hormones mediate changes in adaptive choice and motivation in female rats. Front Behav Neurosci. 13, 250 DOl: 10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00250 31780908 PMC6861187 · DOI
  6. [7]Sutton AK & Krashes MJ 2020 Integrating hunger with rival motivations. Trends Endocrinol Metab. DOl: 10.1016/j.tem.2020.04.006 32387196 · DOI
  7. [8]Burnett CJ, Funderburk SC, Navarrete J, Sabol A, Liang-Guallpa J, Desrochers TM, & Krashes MJ 2019 Need-based prioritization of behavior. Elife. 8 DOl: 10.7554/eLife.44527 PMC6433464 30907726 · DOI
  8. [9]Reppucci CJ & Veenema AH 2020 The Social versus Food Preference Test: A behavioral paradigm for studying competing motivated behaviors in rodents. Research Square. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-36244/v1 PMC7666348 33224737 · DOI
  9. [10]Smith CJ, Wilkins KB, Mogavero JN, & Veenema AH 2015 Social novelty investigation in the juvenile rat: Modulation by the mu-opioid system. J Neuroendocrinol. 27(10), 752– 64. DOI: 10.1111/jne.12301 26212131 · DOI
  10. [12]Smith CJW, Wilkins KB, Li S, Tulimieri MT, & Veenema AH 2018 Nucleus accumbens mu opioid receptors regulate context-specific social preferences in the juvenile rat. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 89, 59– 68. DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.12.017 29331800 · DOI
  11. [13]Bull LS & Pitts GC 1971 Gastric capacity and energy absorption in the force-fed rat. J Nutr. 101(5), 593– 6. DOI: 10.1093/jn/101.5.593 5577895 · DOI
  12. [15]Schneider M 2013 Adolescence as a vulnerable period to alter rodent behavior. C ell Tissue Res. 354(1), 99– 106. DOI: 10.1007/s00441-013-1581-2 23430475 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [16]Weissgerber TL, Milic NM, Winham SJ, & Garovic VD 2015 Beyond bar and line graphs: time for a new data presentation paradigm. PLoS Biol. 13(4), e1002128 DOl: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128 25901488 PMC4406565 · DOI
  14. [17]Spear LP 2011 Rewards, aversions and affect in adolescence: emerging convergences across laboratory animal and human data. Dev CognNeurosci. 1(4), 392– 400. DOl: 10.1016/j.dcn.2011.08.001 PMC3170768 21918675 · DOI · Paper page
  15. [18]Walker DM, Bell MR, Flores C, Gulley JM, Willing J, & Paul MJ 2017 Adolescence and reward: Making sense of neural and behavioral changes amid the chaos. J Neurosci. 37(45), 10855– 10866. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1834-17.2017 29118215 PMC5678018 · DOI
  16. [19]Kareem AM & Barnard CJ 1982 The importance of kinship and familiarity in social interactions between mice. Animal Behaviour. 30(2), 594– 601. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-3472(82)80073-0 · DOI
  17. [21]Ellenbroek B & Youn J 2016 Rodent models in neuroscience research: is it a rat race? Dis ModelMech. 9(10), 1079– 1087. DOI: 10.1242/dmm.026120 PMC5087838 27736744 · DOI · Paper page
  18. [22]Kummer KK, Hothansel L, Barwitz CM, Schardl A, Prast JM, Salti A, … Zernig G 2014 Differences in social interaction- vs. cocaine reward in mouse vs. rat. Front Behav Neurosci. 8, 363 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00363 25368560 PMC4201146 · DOI
  19. [23]Menahan LA & Sobocinski KA 1983 Comparison of carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in mice and rats during fasting. Camp Biochem Physiol B. 74(4), 859– 64. DOl: 10.1016/0305-0491(83)90157-8 6861479 · DOI
  20. [24]White CR & Kearney MR 2013 Determinants of inter-specific variation in basal metabolic rate. J Camp Physiol B. 183(1), 1– 26. DOl: 10.1007/s00360-012-0676-5 23001691 · DOI
  21. [25]Moy SS, Nadler JJ, Young NB, Perez A, Holloway LP, Barbaro RP, … Crawley JN 2007 Mouse behavioral tasks relevant to autism: phenotypes of 10 inbred strains. Behav Brain Res. 176(1), 4– 20. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2006.07.030 16971002 PMC1857288 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [26]Moy SS, Nadler JJ, Young NB, Nonneman RJ, Segall SK, Andrade GM, … Magnuson TR 2008 Social approach and repetitive behavior in eleven inbred mouse strains. Behav Brain Res. 191(1), 118– 29. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.03.015 18440079 PMC2441761 · DOI
  23. [28]Siviy SM, Love NJ, DeCicco BM, Giordano SB, & Seifert TL 2003 The relative playfulness of juvenile Lewis and Fischer-344 rats. Physiology & Behavior. 80(2–3), 385– 394. DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2003.09.002 14637239 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [29]Panksepp JB & Lahvis GP 2007 Social reward among juvenile mice. Genes Brain Behav. 6(7), 661– 71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-183X.2006.00295.x 17212648 PMC2040181 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [30]Clemens LE, Jansson EK, Portal E, Riess O, & Nguyen HP 2014 A behavioral comparison of the common laboratory rat strains Lister Hooded, Lewis, Fischer 344 and Wistar in an automated homecage system. Genes Brain Behav. 13(3), 305– 21. DOl: 10.1111/gbb.12093 24119005 · DOI
  26. [31]Newmyer BA, Whindleton CM, Srinivasa N, Jones MK, & Scott MM 2019 Genetic variation affects binge feeding behavior in female inbred mouse strains. Sci Rep. 9(1), 15709 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51874-7 31673099 PMC6823456 · DOI
  27. [32]Atalayer D & Rowland NE 2010 Comparison ofC57BL/6 and DBA/2 mice in food motivation and satiety. Physiol Behav. 99(5), 679– 83. DOl: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.02.001 20138902 PMC2840189 · DOI
  28. [33]Christensen CJ, Kohut SJ, Handler S, Silberberg A, & Riley AL 2009 Demand for food and cocaine in Fischer and Lewis rats. Behav Neurosci. 123(1), 165– 71. DOl: 10.1037/a0013736 19170441 · DOI
  29. [34]Martin L, Sample H, Gregg M, & Wood C 2014 Validation of operant social motivation paradigms using BTBR T+tf/J and C57BL/6J inbred mouse strains. Brain Behav. 4(5), 754– 64. DOI: 10.1002/brb3.273 25328850 PMC4188367 · DOI
  30. [35]Festing MP 2014 Evidence should trump intuition by preferring inbred strains to outbred stocks in preclinical research. ILAR J. 55(3), 399– 404. DOI: 10.1093/ilar/ilu036 25541542 · DOI
  31. [36]Cahill L 2006 Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 7(6), 477– 84. DOl: 10.1038/nm1909 16688123 · DOI
  32. [38]de Vries GJ 2004 Minireview: Sex differences in adult and developing brains: compensation, compensation, compensation. Endocrinology. 145(3), 1063– 8. DOI: 10.1210/en.2003-1504 14670982 · DOI · Paper page
  33. [40]Bredewold R, Smith CJW, Dumais KM, & Veenema AH 2014 Sex-specific modulation of juvenile social play behavior by vasopressin and oxytocin depends on social context. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 8(216). DOl: 10.3389/Fnbeh.2014.00216 PMC4058593 24982623 · DOI · Paper page
  34. [41]Bredewold R, Schiavo JK, van derHart M, Verreij M, & Veenema AH 2015 Dynamic changes in extracellular release of GABA and glutamate in the lateral septum during social play behavior in juvenile rats: Implications for sex-specific regulation of social play behavior. Neuroscience. 307, 117– 127. DOl: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.08.052 26318330 PMC4591248 · DOI · Paper page
  35. [43]Reppucci CJ, Gergely CK, & Veenema AH 2018 Activation patterns of vasopressinergic and oxytocinergic brain regions following social play exposure in juvenile male and female rats. J Neuroendocrinol. DOI: 10.1111/jne.12582 PMC6085164 29424020 · DOI
  36. [45]Northcutt KV & Nguyen JM 2014 Female juvenile play elicits Fos expression in dopaminergic neurons of the VTA. Behav Neurosci. 128(2), 178– 86. DOl: 10.1037/a0035964 24773437 · DOI · Paper page
  37. [46]Niesink RJ & van Ree JM 1982 Short-term isolation increases social interactions of male rats: a parametric analysis. Physiol Behav. 29(5), 819– 25. DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(82)90331-6 7156221 · DOI
  38. [47]Panksepp JB, Wong JC, Kennedy BC, & Lahvis GP 2008 Differential entrainment of a social rhythm in adolescent mice. Behav Brain Res. 195(2), 239– 45. DOl: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.09.010 18840476 PMC2587215 · DOI
  39. [49]Schipper L, Harvey L, van der Beek EM, & van Dijk G 2018 Home alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of individual housing on body weight, food intake and visceral fat mass in rodents. Obes Rev. 19(5), 614– 637. DOl: 10.1111/obr.12663 29334694 · DOI · Paper page
  40. [51]Barnett SA, The rat: A study in behavior. Rev. ed. 1976, Canberra: Australian National University Press xiv, 318 p.
  41. [52]Schweinfurth MK 2020 The social life of Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus). Elife. 9 DOl: 10.7554/eLife.54020 PMC7145424 32271713 · DOI · Paper page
  42. [53]Gilbert C, McCafferty D, Le Maho Y, Martrette JM, Giroud S, Blanc S, & Ancel A 2010 One for all and all for one: the energetic benefits of huddling in endotherms. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 85(3), 545– 69. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00115.x 20039866 · DOI
  43. [54]Pereboom AC 1968 Systematic-representative study of spontaneous activity in the rat. Psychol Rep. 22(3), 717– 32. DOI: 10.2466/pr0.1968.22.3.717 5653360 · DOI
  44. [55]Eagle AL, Fitzpatrick CJ, & Perrine SA 2013 Single prolonged stress impairs social and object novelty recognition in rats. BehavBrainRes. 256, 591– 7. DOl: 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.09.014 PMC3857706 24036168 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reppucci, C. J., Brown, L. A., Chambers, A. Q., & Veenema, A. H.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Reppucci, Christina J.
ORCID
Venue
Physiology & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-12
Volume
227
Pages
113162
ISSN
0031-9384 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113162
PMC
PMC7655716
OpenAlex
W3082003503
Cited by
28
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
4.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Physiology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (IOS 1735934)
  • National Institutes of Health (R01MH102456)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
Keywords
social interaction motivation, food seeking, stimulus preference, food deprivation, social isolation, stimulus salience, sex differences, age differences, adolescent development, Wistar rats, C57BL/6 mice, motivated behavior
MeSH terms
Social Interaction, Animals, Food Preferences, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Motivation, Social Behavior, Rats, Wistar, Mice, 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