» Articles » PMID: 39720306

Impacts of Social Isolation Stress in Safety Learning and the Structure of Defensive Behavior During a Spatial-based Learning Task Involving Thermal Threat

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2024 Dec 25
PMID 39720306
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Safety learning during threat and adversity is critical for behavioral adaptation, resiliency, and survival. Using a novel mouse paradigm involving thermal threat, we recently demonstrated that safety learning is highly susceptible to social isolation stress. Yet, our previous study primarily considered male mice and did not thoroughly scrutinize the relative impacts of stress on potentially distinct defensive mechanisms implemented by males and females during the thermal safety task. The present study assessed these issues while considering a variety of defensive behaviors related to safety-seeking, escape, coping, protection, ambivalence, and risk-taking. After a two-week social isolation stress period, mice were required to explore a box arena that had thermal threat and safety zones (5 vs. 30°C, respectively). Since visuospatial cues clearly differentiated the threat and safety zones, the majority of the no-stress controls (69-75%) in both sexes exhibited optimal memory formation for the safety zone. In contrast, the majority of the stress-exposed mice in both sexes (69-75%) exhibited robust impairment in memory formation for the safety zone. Furthermore, while the control groups exhibited many robust correlations among various defensive behaviors, the stress-exposed mice in both sexes exhibited disorganized behaviors. Thus, stress severely impaired the proper establishment of safety memory and the structure of defensive behavior, effects that primarily occurred in a sex-independent manner.

References
1.
Morris R . Developments of a water-maze procedure for studying spatial learning in the rat. J Neurosci Methods. 1984; 11(1):47-60. DOI: 10.1016/0165-0270(84)90007-4. View

2.
Shansky R . Sex differences in behavioral strategies: avoiding interpretational pitfalls. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2018; 49:95-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2018.01.007. View

3.
Jovanovic T, Kazama A, Bachevalier J, Davis M . Impaired safety signal learning may be a biomarker of PTSD. Neuropharmacology. 2011; 62(2):695-704. PMC: 3146576. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2011.02.023. View

4.
KENDRICK D . Inhibition with reinforcement (conditioned inhibition). J Exp Psychol. 1958; 56(4):313-8. DOI: 10.1037/h0042874. View

5.
Sanders M, Stevens S, Boeh H . Stress enhancement of fear learning in mice is dependent upon stressor type: Effects of sex and ovarian hormones. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2010; 94(2):254-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2010.06.003. View