Defensive burying in the rat: A behavioral field analysis

Time spent in various behaviors by the rat was recorded in a defensive burying paradigm. Experiment 1 revealed that rats spent more time burying the shock prod than a control prod and that doubling the size of the test chamber did not have a significant effect on the time spent in any behavior. In Experiment 2, the location of bedding material in a two-compartment test chamber was found to affect the occurrence of burying (both the shock and control prods) and burrowing behavior. Burying did not occur when bedding was not available in the shock compartment but was located in the escape compartment. Burrowing was more likely to occur when bedding was in both compartments than when it was in only one compartment. Immobility and escape latencies were shorter than burying latencies in all subjects. Burying was viewed as belonging to a second stage of defensive behavior.     

Postshock learning and conditioned defensive burying

Natural sources of aversive stimuli are frequently well-defined material objects that are present both before and after the aversive event. In the present experiment, rats acquired information about such a source after the aversive event and used this information to guide their subsequent defensive reactions to it. The rats were shocked by one of two possible sources, either a black or a striped prod, mounted on opposite end walls of the test chamber. Immediately following the shock, the houselights were momentarily extinguished and the patterns on the two prods were automatically switched for subjects in the experimental condition or left unchanged for subjects in the control condition. The rats were left in the chamber for another 5 min with the patterns in their new positions before being removed for 2 min while the two prods were mounted on the side walls. During the ensuing test of conditioned defensive burying, the rats in the control condition directed the majority of their burying behavior at the prod exhibiting the pattern displayed by the shock source prior to and during the shock administration. In contrast, the rats in the experimental group buried the prod exhibiting the pattern displayed by the shock source during the postshock period more than they did the prod displaying the pattern present on the shock source prior to and during the shock administration.     

Defensive burying in rats and hamsters

Hooded rats and golden hamsters were shocked by one of two prods in a chamber with a sawdust-covered floor. Rats buried the prod through which they had been shocked, but hamsters displayed no burying behavior. Hamsters may not have buried the prod because they could not perform the required motor pattern. However, hamsters can carry and pile food pellets. Therefore, in a second experiment, rats and hamsters were shocked in a chamber with wooden blocks on the floor. Rats piled blocks around the prod through which they had been shocked, but hamsters did not. The third experiment established that, like rats, hamsters can associate a prod with shock in one trial, since they showed differential avoidance of a prod through which they had been shocked. Since hamsters are nonsocial and rats are social, these results are consistent with suggestions that burying sources of aversive stimulation evolved as an altruistic behavior.     

Behavioral field analysis in two strains of rats in a conditioned defensive burying paradigm

Two strains of rats (albino Wistar and hooded PVG/c) were exposed to a conditioned defensive burying paradigm that consisted of placing rats in a test chamber with bedding material on the floor, shocking them with a shock prod, and recording the time each rat spent in burying responses toward the prod. Various behaviors other than burying (freezing, grooming/paw licking) were observed by a time-sampling procedure during the control, conditioning, and extinction sessions, each of which was 15 min in duration. Wistar rats generally showed behavioral inhibition, as evidenced by less burying, lower exploratory and ambulatory behavior, and higher freezing behavior. PVG/c rats spent significantly more time engaged in burying and accumulated more bedding material in the conditioning session than did the Wistar rats. No significant differences between the two strains of rats were observed during the extinction session in terms of these measurements. The results indicate that Wistar rats have a greater tendency to freeze when coping with the noxious stimulus in a conditioned defensive burying paradigm, whereas the dominant coping style for PVG/c rats is defensive burying.     

Social influence on avoidance of dangerous stimuli by rats

Three experiments were conducted to determine whether a naive observer rat would avoid contact with a shock prod after watching a demonstrator rat contact, be shocked by, and defensively bury the prod. We found that observer rats took longer to contact prods that had delivered a shock to and been buried by a demonstrator rat than to contact prods that had not delivered shock and had not been buried. However, observer rats contacted prods buried by an unseen demonstrator rat or by an unseen experimenter with the same latencies as those for prods they had seen deliver shock to and be buried by a demonstrator rat. In large enclosures, subjects took 1–2 h longer to contact buried prods than to contact unburied prods. We conclude that alteration of the physical environment by individuals receiving noxious stimulation can significantly reduce the probability that conspecifics will contact the noxious stimulus. Observational learning per se, however, need not be involved.     

The role of spatial and temporal contiguity in defensive burying in rats

The degree of spatial and temporal contiguity between contact with a prod and shock was varied in three experiments to see how these factors contribute to defensive burying. In Experiment 1, rats shocked once through a grid floor while touching a prod buried the prod just as much as did rats shocked through the prod. Experiment 2 showed that rats either shocked through the floor more than 1 min after touching the prod or shocked in the absence of a prod did not bury the prod. Thus, close temporal contiguity between grid shock and prod contact appears necessary for burying. Nevertheless, grid-shocked rats do learn something different from prod-shocked rats, since they bury the prod less and the walls more than do prod-shocked rats when the position of the prod is changed in the test chamber (Experiment 3).     

Conditioned defensive burying in rats: Availability of burying materials

Rats shocked once by a stationary, wire-wrapped prod mounted on the wall of the test chamber incorporated sand, wooden blocks, or commercial bedding material on the floor of the chamber into a defensive response. They moved the available material toward and over the shock prod in all three conditions, adapting the response topography to the particular demands of the available material. In the sand and bedding conditions, the rats buried the prod by pushing and spraying piles of the material with snout and forepaws, whereas, in the blocks condition they picked up the blocks with their teeth and placed them individually around the prod. In Experiment 2, the rats buried the shock prod with blocks even when they had to first carry the blocks to the prod from the back of the chamber. Thus, conditioned defensive burying is not a simple, reflexive response to objects paired with a painful stimulus: it is a complex behavioral sequence that can vary as a function of the availability of burying materials.     

Conditioned defensive burying in rats free to escape

Rats shocked once by a stationary, wire-wrapped prod bury it if suitable materials are available. Does this conditioned defensive burying occur when rats have the opportunity to flee from the source of aversive stimulation, or is it limited to situations such as those in which it had previously been studied—those in which the relatively small test chamber confined each rat to the immediate vicinity of the prod? In the present experiments, the capacity of rats to flee from the shock prod was enhanced by increasing the floor dimensions of the test chamber up to 200X80 cm (Experiment 1) or by providing the rats with an opportunity to seek refuge in a separate, safe compartment (Experiment 2). Although both of these modifications to the usual conditioned-defensive-burying paradigm significantly reduced the duration of burying and the height of the accumulated mounds, burying remained well above control levels in all experimental conditions.     

Genotype and environment interactively determine the magnitude,directionality, and abolition of defensive burying in mice

Genotypic and environmental contributions to the defensive burying response were examined by testing four sublines of two inbred strains of mice in test chambers of three different lengths. Burying was found to be dependent on both the particular subline tested and the length of the test chamber employed. For two sublines, specific increases in the length of the test chamber resulted in the complete abolition of defensive burying. A third subline never displayed defensive burying, and the fourth buried in all three chamber-length conditions. Sex differences in burying were never observed. Rather than being viewed as a species-specific defensive reaction, it was proposed that defensive burying should more appropriately be viewed as a genotypically dependent response, the expression of which is contingent on the specific environmental context in which an aversive stimulus is encountered. Apparent conflicts in the defensive-burying literature were reconciled in accordance with this interpretation.     

Influence of conspecific stress odors and shock controllability on conditioned defensive burying

In Experiment 1, rats received a session of 80 inescapable tail shocks or no shocks while restrained in a tube. During tests of conditioned defensive burying 24 h later, the bedding of the chamber contained odors from either stressed or nonstressed conspecific donor rats. Following a single prod shock, subjects that had had prior shocks or that were tested with the stress odors spent significantly less time burying the prod, made smaller piles of bedding, and displayed more freezing behavior. The combination of prior shock and stress odors during later testing enhanced these effects. In Experiment 2, a yoked group of rats that was given inescapable shocks, in contrast to a group that had wheel-turn escape training and one that was restrained but not shocked, later showed significantly less burying and more freezing when tested for defensive burying with stress odors present. In both experiments the duration of burying and the heights of piles were positively correlated, and both of these measures were negatively correlated with freezing. The demonstrated capacity of unconditioned stress odors to mediate different degrees of fear, depending upon the controllability of prior shock, is related to other studies of learned helplessness, and the predominance of freezing over burying is discussed in terms of various types of defensive strategies, stimulus-control processes, and the author’s stress-coping-fear-defense (SCFD) theory.     

Prolonged exposure to conspecific and predator odors reduces fear reactions to these odors during subsequent prod-shock tests

In Experiment 1, four groups of male rats were given a session as an intruder in either aggressive (i.e., alpha) or nonaggressive colonies of conspecifics and later received either a 2-h exposure to the odors of the alpha colonies or an exposure-control session with the odors of a nonalpha colony. Two additional groups of rats that had been attacked and defeated by alpha residents were later given a 12-h exposure session with alpha-colony odors or nonaipha-control odors. Twenty-four h after the colony-intruder session, all subjects were given a single 6.5-mA shock from a prod with alpha-colony odors present in the bedding of the test chamber. Attacked rats that had been given exposure-control sessions showed significantly less prod burying and greater freezing than nondefeated subjects. This implies that the alpha-colony odors elicited conditioned fear. In contrast, the attacked subjects that had been given a pretest exposure session with alpha-colony odors showed significantly more prod burying and significantly less freezing. This suggests that the alpha-odor exposure resulted in the extinction of fear to these odors. Furthermore, the 12-h exposure to alpha-colony odors was found to be more effective in reducing fear-mediated responses than was the 2-h exposure. In Experiment 2, three groups of rats were exposed to a cat while they were in a protective cage; later they were given a 12-h exposure session with cat odors, a 12-h exposure-control session with no cat odors, or no exposure treatment. Compared with the two control groups, the subjects that were exposed to cat odors showed less freezing during subsequent prod-shock tests in the presence of cat odors, but they did not show prod burying. The reported changes in fear-mediated reactions to the odors of conspecifics and a predator are discussed in terms of both associative and nonassociative processes.     

Influence of conspecific and predatory Stressors and their associated odors on defensive burying and freezing responses

In Experiment 1, male rats were exposed to either aggressive (i.e., alpha) or nonaggressive conspecific colonies and tested 24 h later, with or without alpha odors, for freezing behavior and burying of a wall prod that had been the source of a brief electric shock. The results indicated that prior defeat experience and the presence of alpha odors alone during testing had no significant effects, but the combination of prior defeat and alpha-odor testing significantly decreased burying and increased freezing behavior. In Experiment 2, we examined the effects of noncontact exposure to a cat, as a predatory Stressor, during subsequent prod-shock tests involving the presence or absence of cat odors. Exposure to a cat failed to disrupt later prod burying and did not produce freezing. However, the presence of cat odors during testing significantly reduced the amount of defensive burying,without resulting in an increment in freezing. In Experiment 3, rats were given 1, 5, or 30 inescapable preshocks in the presence of either cat odors or a hedonically neutral citronella odor and were tested 24 h later for prod burying and freezing with or without these odors. Both the cat and the citronella odors resulted in a significant reduction in burying and an increase in freezing for rats given 5 and 30 preshocks and tested in the presence of these respective conditioned odors. For the groups that were given 5 preshocks, preshock and later testing in the presence of cat odors resulted in significantly less prod burying and more freezing than for rats that were preshocked and tested in the presence of citronella. The findings of these three ethoexperimental studies are discussed in terms of the learned-helplessness theory, the stress-coping-fear-defense (SCFD) theory, and the concept of selective CS-US associability.     

Generality of US preexposure effects: Transfer from food to shock or shock to food with and without the same response requirements

A series of four experiments, employing mice, investigated the generality of the learned helplessness phenomenon. The first two experiments used preexposure to aversive stimuli (shock), while the other two used preexposure to appetitive stimuli (food). In all of the studies, subjects were preexposed to contingent, noncontingent, or no stimuli (except for Experiment 2) in a Skinner box. During the test, animals preexposed to shock were tested with food, and those preexposed to food were tested with shock. The test was conducted in a similar situation, a Skinner box (Experiments 1, 3), or a different situation—a runway (Experiments 2, 4). Performance decrements were evident when subjects that were preexposed to a noncontingent stimulus were compared with subjects preexposed to contingent stimuli. The differences between the contingent and the noncontingent groups were significant, as were the differences between the contingent and the nonpreexposed groups (except for Experiment 1). The effects cut across the different types of stimuli, situations, and response requirements of the preexposure and test phases.     

Influence of duration and number of inescapable shocks on intrashock activity and subsequent interference effects

A three-phase investigation of the effects of duration and number of inescapable shocks with rats was conducted. In the first phase (shock treatment), separate groups were exposed either to 64 or 128 5-sec shocks or to 32, 64, or 128 10-sec shocks. Measures of intrashock activity were found to be lower for the groups exposed to 64 or 128 10-sec shocks than for any other group. In the second phase (Test Day 1), half of each group was tested for interference with FR 1, locomotor escape-avoidance learning at either 24 or 168 h following cessation of shock treatment, using a control procedure that was designed to equate groups for exposure to test shock. The results indicated that, relative to nonshock-treated controls, at each interval only the groups previously given 64 or 128 10-sec shocks were impaired in terms of escape frequency. However, all groups given at least 64 shocks exhibited depressed intertrial responding at the 24-h, but not the 168-h, interval. In the final phase (Test Days 2–4), the control procedure for equalizing test-shock exposure was discontinued and a pattern of interference effects was observed in terms of escape-avoidance response latency that was identical to that reported for the escape frequency in Phase 2. In general, these data were viewed as indicating that duration, but not total amount of shock, was a critical determinant of behavior during inescapable shock and of the subsequent interference effect. Both effects of duration were regarded as the product of a common associative process involving the learning of immobility tendencies to shock that served to compete with later escape-avoidance responding.     

Defensive burying in the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus) as a function of size and shape of the test chamber

Attempts to establish the generality of the defensive-burying response have proved quite successful with several strains of albino and hooded rats and with mice. However, three previous attempts to demonstrate this behavior in gerbils have been completely unsuccessful. Three additional defensive-burying experiments employing gerbils as subjects are reported. Defensive burying did not occur when testing took place in a rectangular chamber (Experiments 1 and 3), but did occur when a circular chamber was employed (Experiments 2 and 3). Hence, the geometric shape of the test chamber appears to be a crucial factor in determining the elicitation of this behavior in gerbils. Furthermore, the overall topography of the gerbil defensive-burying response was found to be different from that of previously examined species.     

Pavlovian conditioning to contexts that precede the place where shock occurs as measured by freezing and activity suppression in mice

Three experiments were conducted to demonstrate that the place where an organism has been, before the organism is moved to a place with aversive consequences, can also become aversive through classical conditioning. In Experiment 1, two groups of 8 mice were exposed to three different contexts in succession, with a single shock occurring in the third context. The distal context was a putative 3-min conditioned stimulus (CS) for freezing; the second context was a delay manipulation; and the unconditioned stimulus (US) occurred in the proximal context. The group delayed for 15 sec showed significantly more freezing to the distal CS context than did the group delayed for 3 h. In a second experiment, conditioning to the distal context was demonstrated with a discrimination procedure for 8 more mice by using two different distal contexts as CS+ and CS? for the proximal context with shock. On CS+ days, 3 min of exposure to the distal context was followed within 5 sec by placement in the proximal box where shock occurred, whereas on CS? days, exposure to a second distal context was followed immediately by return to the home cage. Very strong differences in freezing between the CS+ and CS? distal contexts were found in all 8 mice after 14 days of conditioning. In a third experiment, the discriminative procedure was repeated for 9 more mice, with two changes. More objective stabilometertype activity measures were substituted for observed freezing, and, in addition to the CS+ and CS? distal context trials, each mouse was also exposed to a third discriminative distal context, which was followed by 15 min in a delay chamber followed by shock in the proximal context. This discrimination procedure with the activity suppression measure again resulted in significant differences between the contexts. The CS+ context and the context followed by a 15-min delay did not differ, but both of them differed from the CS? context.     

胰岛素休克小鼠血糖变化的研究

研究小鼠禁食不同时间及注射胰岛素导致小鼠休克时血糖的变化,并观察酸性生理盐水稀释胰岛素对低血糖休克出现时间及血糖值有无影响.结果表明,小鼠分别禁食12﹑18﹑22﹑24h时的血糖值之间无明显差异（P〉0.05）,在各组小鼠注射胰岛素后,血糖均明显下降（P〈0.05）,但各组下降后的血糖值之间无明显差异（P〉0.05）;不同剂量的胰岛素或是否用酸性生理盐水稀释胰岛素,注射后出现休克的时间及休克时各组小鼠血糖值之间无明显差异（P〉0.05）.     

Bidirectional avoidance by mice as a function of CS,US, and apparatus variables

Acquisition of two-way avoidance by mice was slower with a light CS than with a buzzer CS, with punishment of intertrial responses than without punishment, and with a short CS-CS interval than with a long CS-CS interval (30 vs. 60 sec). Light-cued avoidance was little affected by shock level (.35–1.5 mA), whereas mice trained with the buzzer CS learned faster at 1.5 mA. Animals required to move away from light or toward light showed comparable rates of acquisition. Other CS, US, and apparatus variables (directionality of cue, maximal shock duration, and presence vs. absence of a central partition in the shuttlebox) interacted in a complex fashion with those already mentioned. This resulted in widely differing performances in what may superficially appear to be different versions of the same task. The differences in mouse and rat responses to some of the variables can contribute to an understanding of the interactions between organismic and test factors and the relative explanatory value of alternative avoidance models.     

浅谈原始社会的二次丧葬习俗

丧葬习俗是表现人们如何安置死者的灵魂,如何处理尸体的仪式和活动。二次葬是古代一种常见的丧葬习俗,通过对二次葬的研究,对于研究既往时代人类的意识形态、洞察他们精神生活和物质生活具有重要的意义。二次葬的葬俗对后世人们处理尸体可以提供借鉴。     

Tonic immobility in chickens: Is a stimulus that signals shock more aversive than the receipt of shock?

Three experiments were conducted on the effect of shock and aversive conditioning on tonic immobility. In the first study, increasing the intensity of preinduction shock was shown to produce reliable increases in the duration of immobility. Using classical conditioning procedures in the second experiment, a significant effect of UCS intensity was obtained. In the third experiment, brief confrontation with a conditioned fear stimulus was found more effective than shock for enhancing immobility duration. The data were discussed in terms of the fear hypothesis of animal hypnosis and as supporting a more general notion that the anticipation of shock may be more aversive than the receipt of shock.