Back

Social status in zebrafish modulates the behavioral response to 5-HT2C receptor agonists and antagonists

de Oliveira, L. N.; Alves, N. F. P.; Soares, M. C.; Maximino, C.

2023-04-27 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.04.26.538457 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The effects of previous social experiences on social behavior have been demonstrated across species both in cooperative and competitive contexts. In dominance-subordinate hierarchies, differences across social ranks have been observed in many different mechanisms. Dominance hierarchies interfere in defensive behavior, where subordinate animals present a greater defensive behavior, regarding potential threats ("anxiety-like behavior"), than dominant animals. The serotonergic system plays a key role in regulating and mediating threat responses, including 5-HT2 receptors in the types of proximal threat responses modulated by the stress of social defeat. We separated 148 adult zebrafish in pairs, and allowed to interact for five days; after that, the dominant-subordinate rank was determined, and animals were treated with a 5-HT2C receptor agonist (MK-212) or antagonist (RS-102221) before being observed in the novel tank test. While MK-212 increased bottom-dwelling, erratic swimming, and freezing across all statuses, RS-102221 decreased these variables in dominants but increased them in subordinates. Moreover, the effects of MK-212 were larger in subordinates than in controls or dominants, suggesting a sensitization of the 5-HT2C receptor.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Hormones and Behavior
○ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.1%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 11%
6.4%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Behavioural Processes
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
eneuro
● 439 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
6
European Journal of Neuroscience
○ 189 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.6%
Similar papers in this journal
7
Behavioural Brain Research
○ 77 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.6%
8
Journal of Experimental Biology
● 259 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
9
Physiology & Behavior
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.3%
11
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.2%
12
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological and Integrative Physiology
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.2%
13
Journal of Neuroendocrinology
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
14
Peer Community Journal
● 281 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
15
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.5%
16
Psychoneuroendocrinology
○ 36 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
17
Developmental Psychobiology
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
18
Neuroscience
○ 97 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
19
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
○ 40 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
20
The Journal of Neuroscience
● 1025 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.1%
21
Neurobiology of Stress
○ 43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
22
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
23
General and Comparative Endocrinology
○ 21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
24
Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
○ 17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
25
Psychopharmacology
○ 69 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
26
Journal of Neurochemistry
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
27
Molecular Ecology
○ 336 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
28
Frontiers in Neural Circuits
○ 43 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
29
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.9%
30
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 39%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.