CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 76Memory and Neural MechanismsAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior

Social cues shift functional connectivity in the hypothalamus

Open access
Hoke, Kim L., Ryan, Michael J., Wilczynski, Walter·2005·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0502361102PMC PMC1180772
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We determined how social stimuli that vary in behavioral relevance differentially activate functional networks in the frog hypothalamus. As measured by egr-1 mRNA levels, activity in three hypothalamic nuclei varied with acoustic stimulus, and these responses were correlated with egr-1 responses in different auditory regions regardless of stimulus. The correlations among hypothalamic nuclei, however, varied as a function of the behavioral relevance of the stimuli. Thus relevant social cues shift the functional connectivity within the hypothalamus, consistent with principles that underlie the simultaneous processing of sensory information in cognitive tasks.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0502361102

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • Pearson cross-correlation matrices of regional Fos activation can be used as surrogate parameters for functional connectivity among selected brain regions.

    “We employed Pearson cross-correlation matrices of regional Fos activation as surrogate parameters for functional connectivity among selected brain regions (Table 1).53”

    From Preferential loss of dorsal-hippocampus synapses underlies memory impairments provoked by short, multimodal stress (2014) · cites this paper as [53]

  • Previous experiments in non-mammalian species have used correlated expression of cytochrome oxidase and immediate early genes (IEGs) to demonstrate that distributed patterns of transcriptional and metabolic activity across SDMN nuclei are strongly predictive of social context and behavior.

    “Previous experiments in non-mammalian species have used correlated expression of cytochrome oxidase (a metabolic marker) and immediate early genes (IEGs) to demonstrate that distributed patterns of transcriptional and metabolic activity across SDMN nuclei are strongly predictive of social context and behavior”

    From Oxytocin receptors modulate a social salience neural network in male prairie voles (2017) · cites this paper as Hoke et al., 2005

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: 43

  1. [1]Friston, K. J., Frith, C. D., Liddle, P. F. & Frackowiak, R. S. (1993) J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 13, 5-14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [2]Bressler, S. L. (1995) Brain Res. Rev. 20, 288-304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [3]Horwitz, B., Tagamets, M. A. & McIntosh, A. R. (1999) Trends Cognit. Sci. 3, 91-98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. [4]McIntosh, A. R. & Gonzalez-Lima, F. (1991) Brain Res. 547, 295-302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. [5]Newman, S. W. (1999) Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 877, 242-257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. [6]Crews, D. (2003) Dev. Psychobiol. 43, 1-10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. [7]Sakata, J. T., Coomber, P., Gonzalez-Lima, F. & Crews, D. (2000) Brain Behav. Evol. 55, 139-151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. [9]Ryan, M. J., ed. (2001) Anuran Communication (Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC).
  9. [10]Wilczynski, W. & Northcutt, R. G. (1983) J. Comp. Neurol. 214, 321-332. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. [11]Neary, T. J. & Wilczynski, W. (1986) Neurosci. Lett. 71, 142-146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. [12]Hall, J. C. & Feng, A. S. (1987) J. Comp. Neurol. 258, 407-419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. [13]Endepols, H. & Walkowiak, W. (2001) J. Comp. Physiol. A 186, 1119-1133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. [14]Allison, J. D. & Wilczynski, W. (1991) Brain Behav. Evol. 38, 322-331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. [15]Endepols, H., Roden, K., Luksch, H., Dicke, U. & Walkowiak, W. (2004) J. Comp. Neurol. 468, 299-310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. [16]Brzoska, J. & Obert, H. (1980) J. Comp. Physiol. A 140, 25-29. [Google Scholar]
  16. [17]Burmeister, S. S. & Wilczynski, W. (2000) Horm. Behav. 38, 201-209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. [18]Burmeister, S. S. & Wilczynski, W. (2005) Brain Behav. Evol. 65, 26-32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. [19]Lea, J., Dyson, M. & Halliday, T. (2001) Anim. Behav. 61, 373-377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. [20]Allison, J. D. (1992) J. Comp. Physiol. A 171, 387-395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. [21]Wilczynski, W. & Allison, J. D. (1989) Brain Behav. Evol. 33, 317-324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. [22]Ball, J. N. (1981) Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 44, 135-170. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. [23]Schmidt, R. S. (1968) Behaviour 30, 239-257. [Google Scholar]
  23. [24]Schmidt, R. S. (1989) Horm. Behav. 23, 1-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. [25]Endepols, H., Schul, J., Gerhardt, H. C. & Walkowiak, W. (2004) J. Neurobiol. 60, 395-410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. [26]Ryan, M. J. (1980) Science 209, 523-525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. [27]Ryan, M. J. & Rand, A. S. (1995) Science 269, 390-392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. [28]Rand, A. S. & Ryan, M. J. (1981) Z. Tierpsychol. 57, 209-214. [Google Scholar]
  28. [29]Farris, H. E., Rand, A. S. & Ryan, M. J. (2002) Brain Behav. Evol. 60, 181-188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. [30]Hoke, K. L., Burmeister, S. S., Fernald, R. D., Rand, A. S., Ryan, M. J. & Wilczynski, W. (2004) J. Neurosci. 24, 11264-11272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. [31]Neary, T. J. & Northcutt, R. G. (1983) J. Comp. Neurol. 213, 262-278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. [32]Wilczynski, W. & Capranica, R. R. (1984) Prog. Neurobiol. 22, 1-38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. [33]Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999) Struct. Eq. Model. Multidiscip. J. 6, 1-55. [Google Scholar]
  33. [35]Mello, C. V., Vicario, D. S. & Clayton, D. F. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 6818-6822. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. [36]Jarvis, E. D., Schwabl, H., Ribeiro, S. & Mello, C. V. (1997) NeuroReport 8, 2073-2077. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. [37]Jarvis, E. D. & Mello, C. V. (2000) J. Comp. Neurol. 419, 1-31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. [38]Jarvis, E. D., Ribeiro, S., da Silva, M. L., Ventura, D., Vielliard, J. & Mello, C. V. (2000) Nature 406, 628-632. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. [39]Clayton, D. F. (2000) Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 74, 185-216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. [41]Allison, J. D. & Wilczynski, W. (1994) Brain Behav. Evol. 43, 129-139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. [42]Bullier, J. & Nowak, L. G. (1995) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 5, 497-503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. [43]Buchel, C. & Friston, K. J. (1997) Cereb. Cortex 7, 768-778. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. [44]McIntosh, A. R. (1998) Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 855, 556-571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. [45]Hirsch, J., Moreno, D. R. & Kim, K. H. (2001) J. Cognit. Neurosci. 13, 389-405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. [46]Mesulam, M. M. (1998) Brain 121, 1013-1052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hoke, K. L., Ryan, M. J., & Wilczynski, W.
Affiliations
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (PA)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2005-07-14
Volume
102
Issue
30
Pages
10712-10717
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.0502361102
PMC
PMC1180772
OpenAlex
W2120709449
Cited by
76
References
45
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Keywords
hypothalamus, functional connectivity, social cues, behavioral relevance, acoustic stimuli, auditory processing, simultaneous processing, frogs, hypothalamic nuclei, sensory integration
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Anura, Cues, Female, Hypothalamus, Neuronal Plasticity, Panama, Sexual Behavior, Animal, Social Environment, Vocalization, Animal, In Situ Hybridization, Early Growth Response Protein 1

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