Effects of minor laboratory procedures, adrenalectomy, social defeat or acute alcohol on regional brain concentrations of corticosterone

Concentrations of corticosterone in brain areas of TO strain mice were measured by radioimmunoassay. The studies examined the effects of routine laboratory maneuvers, variation during the circadian peak, adrenalectomy, social defeat and acute injections of alcohol on these concentrations. Brief handling of mice increased corticosterone levels in plasma but not in striatum and reduced those in the hippocampus. Single injections of isotonic saline raised the plasma concentrations to a similar extent as the handling, but markedly elevated concentrations in the three brain regions. Five minutes exposure to a novel environment increased hippocampal and cerebral cortical corticosterone levels and striatal concentrations showed a larger rise. However, by 30 min in the novel environment, plasma concentrations rose further while those in striatum and cerebral cortex fell to control levels and hippocampal corticosterone remained elevated. Over the period of the circadian peak the hippocampal and striatal concentrations paralleled the plasma concentrations but cerebral cortical concentrations showed only small changes. Adrenalectomy reduced plasma corticosterone concentrations to below detectable levels after 48 h but corticosterone levels were only partially reduced in the hippocampus and striatum and remained unchanged in the cerebral cortex. Single or repeated social defeat increased both brain and plasma concentrations after 1 h. Acute injections of alcohol raised the regional brain levels in parallel with plasma concentrations. The results show that measurements of plasma concentrations do not necessarily reflect the levels in brain. The data also demonstrate that corticosterone levels can change differentially in specific brain regions. These results, and the residual hormone seen in the brain after adrenalectomy, are suggestive evidence for a local origin of central corticosterone.

What sets the odds of winning and losing?

Social experience influences the outcome of conflicts such that winners are more likely to win again and losers will more likely lose again, even against different opponents. Although winner and loser effects prevail throughout the animal kingdom and crucially influence social structures, the ultimate and proximate causes for their existence remain unknown. We propose here that two hypotheses are particularly important among the potential adaptive explanations: the 'social-cue hypothesis', which assumes that victory and defeat leave traces that affect the decisions of subsequent opponents; and the 'self-assessment hypothesis', which assumes that winners and losers gain information about their own relative fighting ability in the population. We discuss potential methodologies for experimental tests of the adaptive nature of winner and loser effects.