| Literature DB >> 28539519 |
Kelly J Robinson1, Sean D Twiss2, Neil Hazon3, Simon Moss4, Patrick P Pomeroy4.
Abstract
The neuropeptide hormone oxytocin modulates numerous social and parental behaviours across a wide range of species, including humans. We conducted manipulation experiments on wild grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) to determine whether oxytocin increases proximity-seeking behaviour, which has previously been correlated with endogenous oxytocin concentrations in wild seal populations. Pairs of seals that had never met previously were given intravenous injections of 0.41 µg kg-1 oxytocin or saline and were observed for 1 h post-manipulation. The dose was designed to mimic endogenous oxytocin concentrations during the observation period, and is one of the lowest doses used to manipulate behaviour to date. Seals given oxytocin spent significantly more time in close proximity to each other, confirming that oxytocin causes conspecifics to seek others out and remain close to one another. Aggressive and investigative behaviours also significantly fell after oxytocin manipulations. Despite using a minimal oxytocin dose, pro-social behavioural changes unexpectedly persisted for 2 days despite rapid dose clearance from circulation post-injection. This study verifies that oxytocin promotes individuals staying together, demonstrating how the hormone can form positive feedback loops of oxytocin release following conspecific stimuli, increased motivation to remain in close proximity and additional oxytocin release from stimuli received while in close proximity.Entities:
Keywords: intravenous; manipulation; oxytocin; proximity-seeking behaviour; seal; social behaviour
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28539519 PMCID: PMC5454273 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0554
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
Mean values (with standard errors) for the frequencies of approaches, checks, aggressive behaviour and the time spent within one body length of the response animal (proximity) for each type of trial.
| trial type | meeting type | approaches | checks | aggressive behaviours | time within one body length (proximity) (hours: minutes: seconds) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| oxytocin manipulation ( | initial | 8.5 (±1.1) | 51.4 (±3.2) | 17 (±3.9) | 00: 44: 12 (±00: 02: 18) |
| second | 5.8 (±1.2) | 47.4 (±1.1) | 17.3 (±4) | 00: 44: 51 (±00: 03: 22) | |
| saline manipulation ( | initial | 7.2 (±1.1) | 67.7 (±3.9) | 27.3 (±5.9) | 00: 32: 35 (±00: 03: 08) |
| second | 5.3 (±1.4) | 48 (±7.3) | 19.8 (±6.2) | 00: 44: 25 (±00: 03: 22) |
Model output from all GAMMs analysing behavioural responses in recognition trials with their standard errors, estimates and p-values. Significant p-values (p ≤ 0.05) are indicated in italics.
| model: response variable | predictor variables | estimate | standard error | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| approaches | manipulation type (saline) | −0.1 | 0.09 | 0.1 |
| meeting type (second) | −0.3 | 0.1 | ||
| sex (male) | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.5 | |
| time in captivity | −0.02 | 0.02 | 0.5 | |
| checks | manipulation type (saline) | 0.2 | 0.03 | |
| meeting type (second) | −0.2 | 0.03 | ||
| sex (male) | −0.01 | 0.1 | 0.9 | |
| time in captivity | −0.02 | 0.007 | ||
| aggressive interactions | manipulation type (saline) | 0.3 | 0.05 | |
| meeting type (second) | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.6 | |
| sex (male) | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.7 | |
| time in captivity | −0.1 | 0.02 | ||
| proximity | manipulation type (saline) | −687.9 | 240.1 | |
| meeting type (second) | −141.5 | 255.8 | 0.6 | |
| interaction term (manipulation and meeting type) | 717.6 | 362.2 | ||
| sex (male) | −10.03 | 199.1 | 0.9 | |
| time in captivity | 77.5 | 39.6 | 0.06 |
Figure 1.The amount of time spent within one body length of the other trial individual across the initial and second meetings under oxytocin manipulation (n = 40) and saline manipulation (n = 40) with standard error (SEM) bars. Asterisks denote treatments that are significantly from others. Standard deviations for the groups were: saline 1st: 880.3, oxytocin 1st: 649.1, saline 2nd: 857.1, oxytocin 2nd: 858.0.
Figure 3.The frequency of aggressive interactions across the initial and second meetings under oxytocin manipulation (n = 40) and saline manipulation (n = 40) with SEM bars. Asterisks denote treatments that are significantly from others. Standard deviations for the groups were: saline 1st: 27.9, oxytocin 1st: 18.7, saline 2nd: 26.3, oxytocin 2nd: 17.0.
Random effects model outputs from all GAMMs analysing behavioural responses in recognition trials with their standard deviations and p-values. Significant p-values (p ≤ 0.05) are indicated in italics.
| model: response variable | GAMM random effect | standard deviation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| approaches | focal individual | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| response individual | 0.4 | ||
| checks | focal individual | 0.3 | |
| response individual | 0.2 | ||
| aggressive interactions | focal individual | 1.2 | |
| response individual | 1.4 | ||
| proximity | focal individual | 196.6 | 0.9 |
| response individual | 196.6 | 0.9 |