![]() Portillo W, Paredes RG (2003) Sexual and olfactory preference in noncopulating male rats. Garcia-Cardenas N, Olvera-Hernandez S, Gomez-Quintanar BN, Fernandez-Guasti A (2015) Male rats with same sex preference show high experimental anxiety and lack of anxiogenic-like effect of fluoxetine in the plus maze test. Olvera-Hernandez S, Hernandez A, Reyes R, Fernandez-Guasti A (2019) Establishment of partner preference in male rats: effect of prenatal letrozole and sexual experience. Stern JJ (1970) Responses of male rats to sex odors. Brain Res 1066:101–108Ĭarr WJ, Loeb LS, Dissinger ML (1965) Responses of rats to sex odors. Hosokawa N, Chiba A (2005) Effects of sexual experience on conspecific odor preference and estrous odor-induced activation of the vomeronasal projection pathway and the nucleus accumbens in male rats. Vega Matuszczyk J, Shree Appa R, Larsson K (1994) Age-dependent variations in the sexual preference of male rats. Behav Neurosci 117:55–68Īgmo A, Pfaff DW (1999) Research on the neurobiology of sexual behavior at the turn of the millennium. Elsevier, Kidlington, Oxford UKĪgmo A (2003) Lack of opioid or dopaminergic effects on unconditioned sexual incentive motivation in male rats. Pfaff DW, Joels M (eds) (2017) Hormones, brain and behavior, vol 1. Vega Matuszczyk J, Larsson K (1993) Sexual orientation and sexual motivation of the adult male rat. In: Lissak K (ed) Hormones and brain function. Meyerson BJ, Lindstrom L (1973) Sexual motivation in the neonatally androgen-treated female rat. Paredes RG (2009) Evaluating the neurobiology of sexual reward. Key wordsĪgmo A, Turi AL, Ellingsen E, Kaspersen H (2004) Preclinical models of sexual desire: conceptual and behavioral analyses. In conclusion, partner preference is a methodology widely used to elucidate the neural, hormonal, and experiential factors underlying sexual motivation in both female and male animals. ![]() In addition, we present new findings that explain apparent sex differences in sexual motivation often observed in partner preference tests. We focus primarily on the rat as a model organism. Here, we describe various methodological considerations, highlight critical procedures, and discuss the ways partner preference tests contribute to our overall understanding of sexual function. In some tests, physical contact is limited whereas other tests allow for full mating interactions. The partner preference paradigm also requires choice subjects are free to a make a choice between spending time near or with either of two stimulus animals. The partner preference paradigm relies on approach behavior to indicate motivation to interact with an opposite-sex (sexual stimulus animal) or same-sex (social stimulus animal) conspecific. Despite the variable characteristics of the apparatus used, two key elements are endemic to all versions of this paradigm: approach and choice. The partner preference test has been used to evaluate the neurobiology of sexual motivation in animal models.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |