1967
DOI: 10.3758/bf03330637
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of habenular and medial forebrain bundle lesions on sexual behavior in female rats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
1

Year Published

1967
1967
2004
2004

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
1
13
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the observation that exposure of the midbrain Hab region to RU 38486 reduced lordosis behavior in 5 of 14 rats tested leaves open the possibility that the Hab or other midbrain sites may be important secondary targets of P facilitation of estrous behavior as well. Indeed two laboratories have reported that lesions 1616 RU 38486, ESTROUS BEHAVIOR, AND BRAIN P RECEPTORS Endo • 1986 Volll9«No4 of the Hab decrease both receptivity and proceptivity in estrogen-progestin-treated female rats (19,20), and P implants in the Hab have been reported to facilitate both components of estrous behavior in one study (21) but not in another (17). In contrast, we found no consistent effect of POA or IP implants of RU 38486 on P stimulation of mating.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, the observation that exposure of the midbrain Hab region to RU 38486 reduced lordosis behavior in 5 of 14 rats tested leaves open the possibility that the Hab or other midbrain sites may be important secondary targets of P facilitation of estrous behavior as well. Indeed two laboratories have reported that lesions 1616 RU 38486, ESTROUS BEHAVIOR, AND BRAIN P RECEPTORS Endo • 1986 Volll9«No4 of the Hab decrease both receptivity and proceptivity in estrogen-progestin-treated female rats (19,20), and P implants in the Hab have been reported to facilitate both components of estrous behavior in one study (21) but not in another (17). In contrast, we found no consistent effect of POA or IP implants of RU 38486 on P stimulation of mating.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 83%
“…Because some lesion and hormone implant studies have also implicated the habenula [(Hab) Refs. [19][20][21], interpeduncular (IP) region of the midbrain (21)(22)(23)(24), and preoptic area [(POA) Ref. 25] as potential sites of P action, we also directed some RU 38486 implants at these brain regions as well.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of the high resolution of the macrophotographs, this method permits precise selection and three-dimensional orientation of the specimen for the intended series of sections. After embedding in Araldite, complete series of semithin sections and, where the organization of the rat habenular Benabid and Jeaugey, 1989;Daffly and Qiao, 1990;Nagao et al, 1993 Analgesia after electrical andchemical stimulation Zhou et al, 1984;Cohen and Melzack, 1985Mahieux and Benabid, 1987;Terenzi et al, 1990 Descending facilitation Huang andCheng, 1998 Modulation of acupuncture analgesia Wang et al, 1987;Takeshige et al, 1993 Reproductive behavior Presence of estrogen-concentrating cells Pfaff and Keiner, 1973;Wagner et al, 1998 Effects of progesterone and antiprogestin implant Tennent et al, 1982;Etgen and Barfield, 1986 Habenular lesions disturb female sexual and maternal behavior Rodgers and Law, 1967;Modianos et al, 1975;Corodimas et al, 1992 Site of massive electrical self stimulation Blander and Wise, 1989;Vachon and Miliaressis, 1992 Metabolic response to self stimulation Gallistel et al, 1985Further biologic behaviors Nutrition Donovick et al, 1969Sleep-waking-cycles Goldstein, 1983Weaver et al, 1989;Haun et al, 1992;Landis et al, 1993Stress responses Chastrette et al, 1991Murray et al, 1994;Wirtshafter et al, 1994Learning Dennis et al, 1991Thornton and Davies, 1991;van Wimersma Greidanus a...…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four male Long-Evans rats, 200 days old, served as Ss to be leashed in apparatus corners. Two of the males were rejected and two were chosen for copulatory reliability in a previous experiment (Rodgers & Law, 1967). The females tested for sexual preference were either Sprague-Dawley albino (N = 5) or Long-Evans hooded rats (N=5).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%