Social and sexual incentive properties of estrogen receptor α, estrogen receptor β, or oxytocin knockout mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social and sexual incentive motivation, defined as the intensity of approach to a social and a sexual incentive, respectively, were studied in female Swiss Webster mice. In the first experiment, the social incentive was a castrated mouse of the same strain as the females, whereas the sexual incentive was an intact male mouse of the same strain. Ovariectomized females were first tested after oil treatment and then after administration of estradiol benzoate + progesterone in doses sufficient to induce full receptivity. The hormones increased sexual incentive motivation while leaving social incentive motivation unaffected. This suggests that sexual incentive motivation in the female mouse is dependent on ovarian hormones. In the next experiment, ovariectomized females were tested with an intact, male estrogen receptor alpha knockout and its wild type as incentives, first without hormones and then when fully receptive. There were no differences in incentive properties between the wild type and the knockout. In a similar experiment, we used an intact male estrogen receptor beta knockout and its corresponding wild type as incentives. The wild type turned out to be a more attractive social incentive than the knockout, while they were equivalent as sexual incentives. Finally, an intact male oxytocin knockout and its wild type were used as incentives. The knockout turned out to be a superior incentive, particularly a superior sexual incentive. The fact that the estrogen receptor beta and oxytocin knockouts have incentive properties different from their wild types may be important to consider in studies of these knockouts' sociosexual behaviors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".