Differential disruption of conditioned ejaculatory preference in the male rat based on different sensory modalities by micro-infusions of naloxone to the medial preoptic area or ventral tegmental area

Conditioned partner preference in male and female rats for a somatosensory cue.

“…In the present study, CPC was denoted as the preference of partner for ejaculation in both male and female rats. Although this has been the consistent dependent measure for males in previous studies using an olfactory or conspecific strain-related cue (Ismail et al, 2009;Ismail, Jones, Graham, Sylvester, & Pfaus, 2011;Ismail et al, 2010;Kippin & Pfaus, 2001a,2001bKippin, Samaha, Sotiropoulos, & Pfaus, 2001;Kippin et al, 1998;Quintana et al, 2018a;Quintana et al, in press;Quintana, Guizar, Rassi, & Pfaus, 2018b), it is not consistent with previous studies of CPC in females where the discrete, male-related cue used was an odor (e.g., Coria-Ávila et al, 2005). In those studies, females displayed a significantly higher number of solicitations with the scented male and chose that male for their first and subsequent ejaculations more frequently.…”

“…How such learning crystallizes the object into a sexual cue requires further study, although we have argued that this must be accompanied by epigenetic changes within neurochemical pathways that link sexual reward to sexual desire (Pfaus, 2009;Pfaus et al, 2012). First experiences with the US alone (e.g., ejaculatory reward experienced with unscented or unjacketed females) or CS alone (e.g., presentations of the odor on a gauze pad to sexually naïve male rats prior to their first sexual experiences to ejaculation with scented females) are able to block the ability of the two to be associated (Quintana et al, 2018a(Quintana et al, ,2018b. Understanding the nature of sexual reward would aid in determining how such pathways are altered, and whether first experiences in individuals with different capacities for sexual arousal may underlie the development of a true fetish relative to a partner preference.…”

Behavioral, Neural, and Molecular Mechanisms of Conditioned Mate Preference: The Role of Opioids and First Experiences of Sexual Reward

“…Infusions to the CP, but not NAc, disrupted partner preference and the time spent huddling, relative to saline infusions. Quintana et al [ 149 ] examined the role of NAL infusions to the mPOA or VTA on CEP. Relative to males infused with saline, infusions of NAL to the mPOA shifted the preference towards the unfamiliar female (similar to peripheral injections of NAL), whereas infusions to the VTA abolished CEP completely.…”

Commentary: “Hearing, touching, and multisensory integration during mate choice” – Sex, Drugs and Leather Jackets

“…Among the many brain areas where opioids are known to facilitate a conditioned partner/mate preference/choice, two major brain hubs are the medial preoptic (mPOA) and ventral tegmental areas (VTAs; Pfaus, 2009 ; Georgiadis et al, 2012 ). Quintana et al ( 2019a ) found that when they microinjected naloxone into the mPOA of males trained to associate the jacket with SRP, their partner/mate preference/choice shifted toward unjacketed females, whereas microinjections of naloxone into the VTA only abolished that preference. Subsequent detection of c-Fos protein induced by the jacket showed that, relative to the control group, microinjections of naloxone into the mPOA suppressed c-Fos in both the mPOA and VTA, whereas microinjections of naloxone into the VTA suppressed c-Fos only in the VTA.…”