Literature DB >> 22433389

Rubbings deposited by cats elicit defensive behavior in rats.

Matthew D May1, Michael T Bowen, Iain S McGregor, William Timberlake.   

Abstract

Laboratory rats display pronounced defensive behaviors when confronted with a range of cat-derived stimuli, including collars worn by a cat, cloths rubbed on a cat, and cat fur. One possible explanation of this phenomenon (the "kairomone hypothesis") is that rats derive a survival advantage by eavesdropping on signals used by cats to communicate with each other. Cats are known to rub their bodies on objects at strategic environmental locations to signal their identity and mating potential to other cats. The current study assessed the sensitivity of laboratory rats to these body rubbings. In Experiment 1, food deprived Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to consume food pellets in one arm of a Y maze. On test day a damp cloth was placed near the food pellets that had been rubbed on a location (wall) where a cat had recently engaged in body rubbing. A control cloth and a collar worn by the cat were also tested. The presence of both the body rubbing residue and the cat collar increased latency to eat and decreased amount of food eaten. The disruption of consummatory behavior in the test environment was still evident 24h later in the absence of odor stimuli. Experiment 2 tested the reaction of naïve Wistar rats to body rubbings using a paradigm in which rats were given the opportunity to hide. Relative to a control condition, rats exposed to a cotton pad wiped on a cat body rubbing location showed increased hiding behavior, decreased exploration and reduced stimulus approach and investigation. These defensive responses persisted for up to 4days following a single stimulus exposure. These results suggest that rats eavesdrop readily on body rubbings cats use for identification purposes, providing further support for a kairomone hypothesis of predator odor avoidance.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22433389     DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Behav        ISSN: 0031-9384


  6 in total

1.  Roles of the volatile terpene, 1,8-cineole, in plant-herbivore interactions: a foraging odor cue as well as a toxin?

Authors:  Miguel A Bedoya-Pérez; Ido Isler; Peter B Banks; Clare McArthur
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 2.  Behavioral responses to odors from other species: introducing a complementary model of allelochemics involving vertebrates.

Authors:  Birte L Nielsen; Olivier Rampin; Nicolas Meunier; Vincent Bombail
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 4.677

3.  Brown rats and house mice eavesdrop on each other's volatile sex pheromone components.

Authors:  Elana Varner; Hanna Jackson; Manveer Mahal; Stephen Takács; Regine Gries; Gerhard Gries
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Hello, kitty: could cat allergy be a form of intoxication?

Authors:  Rodrigo Ligabue-Braun
Journal:  J Venom Anim Toxins Incl Trop Dis       Date:  2020-12-14

5.  Defensive aggregation (huddling) in Rattus norvegicus toward predator odor: individual differences, social buffering effects and neural correlates.

Authors:  Michael T Bowen; Richard C Kevin; Matthew May; Lauren G Staples; Glenn E Hunt; Iain S McGregor
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Are single odorous components of a predator sufficient to elicit defensive behaviors in prey species?

Authors:  Raimund Apfelbach; Michael H Parsons; Helena A Soini; Milos V Novotny
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 4.677

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.