Development of partner preferences in female prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster): The role of social and sexual experience

The neurobiology of social attachment: A comparative approach to behavioral, neuroanatomical, and neurochemical studies

“…A partner preference is inferred when the subject spends significantly more time in side-by-side contact with its familiar partner than with the conspecific stranger. Partner preference formation is reliably seen in both male and female prairie voles in the laboratory after 24 hours of mating and cohabitation ( Figure 1C) (Williams et al, 1992b;Winslow et al, 1993;Insel et al, 1995b). It should be noted that while mating is generally considered necessary for the development of partner preferences in prairie voles Insel et al, 1995b), one study demonstrated that ovariectomized female prairie voles were capable of forming partner preferences during an extended cohabitation with a male in the absence of mating (Williams et al, 1992b).…”

“…A reliable behavioral index of pair bond formation in the laboratory is the development of a preference for a familiar mate (partner preference) (Williams et al, 1992b;Winslow et al, 1993;Insel et al, 1995a). This preferential affiliation can be quantified using a partner preference test, first developed in the laboratory of Dr. Sue Carter (Williams et al, 1992b). In general, the three-chamber testing apparatus consists of a central cage connected by hollow tubes to two identical cages, each containing a stimulus animal.…”

“…It has been demonstrated that 24 hours of mating and cohabitation between an adult male and female prairie vole reliably results in the formation of a partner preference, as indicated by the subject's preferential affiliation with its familiar partner versus a conspecific stranger (Williams et al, 1992b;Insel et al, 1995a;Insel et al, 1995b;Aragona et al, 2003). In contrast, 1-6 hours of cohabitation without mating is insufficient to produce a partner preference in this species (Williams et al, 1992b;Insel et al, 1995a;Insel et al, 1995b;Cho et al, 1999).…”

“…In contrast, 1-6 hours of cohabitation without mating is insufficient to produce a partner preference in this species (Williams et al, 1992b;Insel et al, 1995a;Insel et al, 1995b;Cho et al, 1999). This paradigm has become useful in pharmacological studies investigating the neurochemical regulation of pair bonding.…”

“…DA, particularly in mesolimbic brain regions, has also been implicated in the mediation of a variety of natural rewards (Wise et al, 1989;Bozarth, 1991) including mating (Everitt, 1990) which facilitates pair bonding (Carter et al, 1990;Williams et al, 1992b;Insel et al, 1995b;Curtis et al, 2003a;Wang et al, 2004). For these reasons, DA was hypothesized to play a role in pair bonding and the DAergic regulation of social attachment has since become an important focus of the field.…”