| Title: | Olfactory bulb removal: effects on sexual behavior and partner-preference in male rats |
| Author(s): | Edwards DA; Griffis KT; Tardivel C; |
| Address: | "Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322" |
| DOI: | 10.1016/0031-9384(90)90342-2 |
| ISSN/ISBN: | 0031-9384 (Print) 0031-9384 (Linking) |
| Abstract: | "Control and bilaterally bulbectomized male rats were tested in an arena where the male could choose to spend time with (and mate with) a sexually receptive female, a nonreceptive female, or be in a neutral compartment. Control males mated with, and showed a strong preference for, sexually receptive females. Bulbectomy virtually eliminated mating. In addition, bulbectomized males showed no preference for a receptive female over a nonreceptive female, and spent their time equally between the receptive female, the nonreceptive female, and the neutral compartment. Effects of bulbectomy on preference and copulation could be consequences of a severely impaired ability to smell--the perception of odors may be essential for sexual arousal, or the absence of preference and copulation after bulbectomy might reflect a deficit in the male's ability to make odor-dependent classification of conspecifics as appropriate sexual partners. Or the behavioral effects of bulbectomy might reflect a disruption of tonic input to the forebrain that has little or nothing to do with the sensory impairment that follows bulb removal. But whatever the reason, in partner-preference tests bulbectomized males show a striking indifference to the sexual status of females, and it seems likely that the failure to mate is causally linked to this effect of surgery" |
| Keywords: | "Animals Arousal/*physiology Brain Mapping Copulation/physiology Dominance, Cerebral/physiology Male *Motivation Olfactory Bulb/*physiology Rats Sexual Behavior, Animal/*physiology Social Environment;" |
| Notes: | "MedlineEdwards, D A Griffis, K T Tardivel, C eng Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. 1990/09/01 Physiol Behav. 1990 Sep; 48(3):447-50. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(90)90342-2" |
