Pharmacology of Ultrasonic Vocalizations in adult Rats: Significance, Call Classification and Neural Substrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pharmacological studies of emotional arousal and initiation of emotional states in rats measured by their ultrasonic vocalizations are reviewed. It is postulated that emission of vocalizations is an inseparable feature of emotional states and it evolved from mother-infant interaction. Positive emotional states are associated with emission of 50 kHz vocalizations that could be induced by rewarding situations and dopaminergic activation of the nucleus accumbens and are mediated by D1, D2, and partially D3 dopamine receptors. Three biologically significant subtypes of 50 kHz vocalizations have been identified, all expressing positive emotional states: (1) flat calls without frequency modulation that serve as contact calls during social interactions; (2) frequencymodulated calls without trills that signal rewarding and significantly motivated situation; and (3) frequency-modulated calls with trills or trills themselves that are emitted in highly emotional situations associated with intensive affective state. Negative emotional states are associated with emission of 22 kHz vocalizations that could be induced by aversive situations, muscarinic cholinergic activation of limbic areas of medial diencephalon and forebrain, and are mediated by M2 muscarinic receptors. Two biologically significant subtypes of 22 kHz vocalizations have been identified, both expressing negative emotional sates: (1) long calls that serve as alarm calls and signal external danger; and (2) short calls that express a state of discomfort without external danger. The positive and negative states with emission of vocalizations are initiated by two ascending reticular activating subsystems: the mesolimbic dopaminergic subsystem as a specific positive arousal system, and the mesolimbic cholinergic subsystem as a specific negative arousal system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".