Cited by 115Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorInfant Health and DevelopmentNeuropeptides and Animal Physiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 53 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Neural circuitry for maternal oxytocin release induced by infant cries

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Oxytocin is a neuropeptide that is important for maternal physiology and childcare, including parturition and milk ejection during nursing 1-6. Suckling triggers the release of oxytocin, but other sensory cues-specifically, infant cries-can increase the levels of oxytocin in new human mothers 7, which indicates that cries can activate hypothalamic oxytocin neurons. Here we describe a neural circuit that routes auditory information about infant vocalizations to mouse oxytocin neurons. We performed in vivo electrophysiological recordings and photometry from identified oxytocin neurons in awake maternal mice that were presented with pup calls. We found that oxytocin neurons responded to pup vocalizations, but not to pure tones, through input from the posterior intralaminar thalamus, and that repetitive thalamic stimulation induced lasting disinhibition of oxytocin neurons. This circuit gates central oxytocin release and maternal behaviour in response to calls, providing a mechanism for the integration of sensory cues from the offspring in maternal endocrine networks to ensure modulation of brain state for efficient parenting.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This study identifies a noncanonical auditory circuit from the posterior intralaminar thalamus (PIL) to hypothalamic oxytocin neurons that relays infant pup calls and gates central oxytocin release and maternal behavior. In maternal mice, pup calls—but not pure tones—produce delayed, persistent activation of PVN oxytocin neurons via NMDAR- and dynamin-dependent long-term depression of inhibition.

Key findings

  • Pup-call presentation increased firing of identified PVN oxytocin neurons (ChR2+, OT+) from Pre 2.9 ± 0.7 Hz to Post 5.0 ± 1.6 Hz (P = 0.001, n = 11 cells from N = 6 dams), but not ChR2− (OT−) neurons (Pre 3.1 ± 0.9 Hz, Post 3.6 ± 1.0 Hz; P = 0.07, n = 11, N = 5). Fibre photometry in dams showed significant responses after calls (Pre versus Calls P = 0.0048; Pre versus Post P = 0.0179, N = 7 dams), significant as early as 25 s from call onset (P = 0.013); responses were specific to pup calls and absent for pure tones, adult calls, or FM down-sweeps, and were not observed in virgins.
  • Rabies tracing showed the PIL contributed 100% of auditory inputs to PVN oxytocin cells versus 0% from the medial geniculate body, auditory cortex, and inferior colliculus. The PIL received synaptic inputs from both the inferior colliculus and auditory cortex, with a greater proportion from the inferior colliculus (P = 0.015, two-tailed Fisher’s test), and PIL-to-PVN oxytocin neuron connections occurred with high probability and preferentially targeted parvocellular oxytocin neurons.
  • Repetitive optogenetic stimulation of PIL terminals in the PVN (30 Hz for 1 s, repeated every 2 s for 3 min) induced lasting disinhibition: IPSC amplitudes decreased and the IPSC/EPSC ratio decreased (P = 0.0018). This iLTD was blocked by AP5, intracellular MK801, and a dynamin inhibitory peptide, but not by MAP4 or the oxytocin receptor antagonist OTA; brief PIL stimulation did not trigger iLTD, and iLTD was occluded in slices from dams exposed to pup-call playback immediately before slice preparation.
  • Saline-injected dams needed 41.6 ± 5.9 played calls to approach the speaker, whereas chemogenetic suppression of PIL-to-PVN input reduced speaker preference (P = 0.002) and decreased retrieval probability at later trials; blocking oxytocin signaling in the VTA also decreased retrieval probability (N = 4 dams, P at least <0.02). OXTR-iTango2 labelling in the VTA showed more tdTomato+EGFP+ cells after blue light + pup calls than after blue light + tones or blue light only, with fewer labelled cells when the PIL-to-PVN pathway was inhibited.

Methods

  • Awake head-fixed maternal mice (dams 0–3 weeks postpartum, first or second birth, housed with pups P0–P21 or just weaned; virgins >6 weeks for some comparisons) underwent in vivo cell-attached/whole-cell recordings and fibre photometry from identified PVN oxytocin neurons during playback of pup distress calls, pure tones, adult calls, or FM sweeps.
  • Circuit mapping used Cre-inducible retrograde rabies tracing, channelrhodopsin 2-assisted circuit mapping, in vitro whole-cell recordings in PVN/PIL slices, optogenetic stimulation of PIL terminals, and pharmacological blockers; behavior used chemogenetic inactivation of PIL-to-PVN neurons, VTA cannula infusion of an oxytocin receptor antagonist, and an OXTR-iTango2 oxytocin sensor in the VTA.
  • Analyses used Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank, Friedman, one-sample t-tests, Mann–Whitney, one-way ANOVA, Fisher’s exact, and binomial tests; sample sizes are reported in figure legends, with no statistical methods used to predetermine sample size and experiments not randomized.

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: no statistical methods were used to predetermine sample size; experiments were not randomized; blinding was not performed for in vivo cell-attached, whole-cell, and tungsten recordings, in vitro whole-cell recordings, and some real-time analyses, though investigators were blinded during behavioral testing and fibre photometry/oxytocin sensor data analysis.
  • Evident from the text: all experiments are in mice, so the human relevance of infant cries increasing oxytocin is inferential; the paper cites human findings but does not test them directly.
  • Evident from the text: several circuit and synaptic conclusions rely on viral tracing, optogenetic/chemogenetic manipulation, pharmacological blockade, and an engineered oxytocin sensor, and some experiments have small sample sizes (e.g., N = 2–7 dams in several photometry, tracing, and sensor experiments).

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-023-06540-4

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

112 Own result · 24 Own interpretation · 21 Not checked yet · 8 Own method · 2 No basis given

Verify all 53 references — free account

Show all 121 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 30
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 22
46 of 46
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mouse pup distress vocalizations are a valid model for human infant cries in studying maternal oxytocin release.

    “Here we describe a neural circuit that routes auditory information about infant vocalizations to mouse oxytocin neurons.”
    “In humans, baby cries are a powerful signal of infant distress, and most nursing mothers respond to cries with increased hypothalamic activity, rises in the levels of plasma oxytocin, comforting behaviours towards the infant and occasional milk ejection7,8.”
1 of 1

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Show all 74 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 115

Metadata

Authors
Valtcheva, S., Issa, H. A., Bair-Marshall, C. J., Martin, K. A., Jung, K., Zhang, Y., Kwon, H.-B., & Froemke, R. C.
Affiliations
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Valtcheva, Silvana
  • Froemke, Robert C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2023-09-20
Volume
621
Issue
7980
Pages
788-795
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W4386886852
Cited by
115
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 10
FWCI
31.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (HD088411)
  • Leon Levy Foundation
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • National Institute of Mental Health (DP1MH119428, T32MH019524)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC12557, HD088411, R01DC012557)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P01NS074972, U19NS107616)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD088411)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Health and Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
Keywords
oxytocin, maternal behavior, infant crying, pup vocalizations, auditory thalamus, neural circuits, disinhibition, sensory cue integration
MeSH terms
Animals, Cues, Female, Hypothalamus, Maternal Behavior, Neural Pathways, Neurons, Oxytocin, Photometry, Thalamic Nuclei, Vocalization, Animal, Wakefulness, Mice

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 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

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

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