Skip to main content
Log in

Co-housing in a stable hierarchical group is not aversive for dominant and subordinate individuals

  • Published:
Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The behavior of individaals and their responses to external stimuli are controlled by the microsocial environment, which for most mammals is associated with dominant-subordinate relationships. Physiological and behavioral differences between dominant and subordinate individuals may be ‘primary’ (genetically determined) or ‘secondary’ (due to position in the group's hierarchical structure). A series of experiments was conducted to investigate the physiological (pain response threshold), immunological (thymus, spleen weights, primary immune response), and behavioral (motor activity, behavior in a shuttle box test) characteristics of dominant and subordinate individuals in groups of three laboratory mice formed on the basis of linear hierarchy. Assessment of the effects of group conditions was made using a conditioned reflex location preference test. The results showed: 1) there are no statistically significant differences in physiological and behavioral (except for motor activity) parameters between dominant and subordinate mice; 2) co-housing of dominant and subordinate individuals in groups with stable hierarchical relationships was not aversive for them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ya. Buresh, O. Bureshova, and D. P. Houston,Methods and Basic Experiments in Studies of the Brain and Behavior [in Russian], Vysshkaya Shkola, Moscow (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  2. N. N. Kudryavtseva, “Features of the aggressive behavior of mice which win in inter-male interactions,”Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,36, No. 5, 1077–1082 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  3. N. N. Kudryavtseva and I. V. Bakshtanovskaya, “Neurochemical control of aggression and submission,”Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,41, No. 5, 459–466 (1991).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. A. V. Kulikov and N. K. Popova, “Studies of the genetic control of ‘spontaneous’ aggression in mice,”Genetika,26, No. 3, 527–531 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. L. Markel', Yu. K. Galaktionov, and V. M. Efimov, “Factor analysis of rat behavior in the open field test,”Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Devat.,38, No. 5, 855–863 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  6. O. Manning,Animal Behavior [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  7. N. A. Popova, S. I. Il'nitskaya, L. A. Kolesnikova, V. I. Kaledin, and N. N. Kudryavtseva, “The effects of chronic social conflicts on a number of non-specific resistance parameters in mice,”Ros. Fiziol. Zh. im. I. M. Sechenova,82, No. 12, 12–17 (1996).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. V. P. Poshivalov, “Pharmacological analysis of hierarchical relationships in mice,”Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,29, No. 1, 167–173 (1979).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. V. P. Poshivalov,The Experimental Psychopharmacology of Aggressive Behavior [in Russian], Nauka, Leningrad (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  10. V. P. Poshivalov and Yu. D. Ignatov, “The relationship between the behavioral response to pain and the hierarchical rank of an animal,”Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,34, No. 4, 767–770 (1984).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. I. Roit,Essential Immunology [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  12. L. I. Serova and E. V. Naumenko, “Zoosocial behavior and the endocrine functions of the gonads in male laboratory mice in micropopulations after selective degradation of noradrenergic neuron terminals in the brain,”Fiziol. Zh. SSSR,73, No. 1, 876 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  13. L. I. Serova, A. V. Osadchuk, and E. V. Naumenko, “The genetic/neurochemical bases of population hierarchy in male laboratory mice. 1. The role of brain catecholamines,”Genetika,25, No. 1, 691–698 (1989).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. S. A. Beden and P. F. Brain, “The primary immune responses to sheep red blood cells in mice of differing social rank for from individual housing,”ICRS Med. Sci.,13, 364–365 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. Benton and P. F. Brain, “Behavioral comparisons of isolated, dominant and subordinate mice,”Behavioural Processes,4, 211–219 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Benton, J. C. Dalrymple-Alford, and P. F. Brain, “Comparisons of measures of dominance in the laboratory mouse,”Anim. Behav.,28, 1274–1279 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. I. D. Chase, “Social process and hierarchy formation in small groups: a comparative perspective,”Amer. Sociol. Rev.,45, 905–924 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. C. Drews, “The concept and definition of dominance in animal behaviour,”Behaviour,125, 283–313 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  19. N. N. Kudryavtseva, “The sensory contact model for the study of aggressive and submissive behaviours in male mice,”Aggress. Behav.,17, No. 5, 285–291 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  20. K. A. Miczek, “Tolerance to analgetic, but not discriminative stimulus effects of morphine after brief social defeat in rats,”Psychopharmacology,104, 181–186 (1991).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. C. H. Wilde and W. H. Vogel, “Influence of the 5-HT1A agonist ipsapirone on voluntary alcohol intake in rats,”Alcohol,11, 411–415 (1994).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vekovishcheva, O.Y., Sukhotina, I.A. & Zvartau, É.E. Co-housing in a stable hierarchical group is not aversive for dominant and subordinate individuals. Neurosci Behav Physiol 30, 195–200 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02463158

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02463158

Key Words

Navigation