Elsevier

Physiology & Behavior

Volume 107, Issue 5, 5 December 2012, Pages 680-685
Physiology & Behavior

Facial expressions of mice in aggressive and fearful contexts

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.03.024Get rights and content

Abstract

Some animals display a variety of context dependent facial expressions. Previous studies have shown that rodents display a facial grimace while in pain. To determine if the facial expressions of mice extend beyond pain, facial expressions were analyzed in the presence of non-social, social and predator stimuli. In a vibrissae contact test, the whiskers of mice were stroked by the bristles of a brush. In a social proximity test, two mice were placed together in a small chamber where contact was virtually unavoidable. In a resident–intruder test of aggression, an unknown mouse was placed into the homecage of another mouse. In a cat odor exposure test and in a live rat exposure test, mice were presented with the respective stimuli. Results from this study indicated that mice showed two patterns of expression, either a full display of changes in the measured facial components, characterized by tightened eyes, flattened ears, nose swells and cheek swells; or a more limited display of these facial changes. The full display of changes occurred in the vibrissae contact test, the social proximity test, and in resident mice in the resident–intruder test. The more limited display of facial changes occurred in the cat odor exposure test, the rat exposure test and in intruder mice in the resident–intruder test. The differential display of facial changes across conditions indicated that mice showed tightened eyes and flattened ears in situations that provided the immediate potential for contact, suggesting that such changes are involved in protection of sensitive and/or vulnerable body parts. Furthermore, the display of facial expressions by mice indicates that these expressions are widely distributed across evolution.

Highlights

► We examine the facial expressions of mice in various contexts. ► Territorial mice show a characteristic facial expression before attacking. ► Mice show facial expressions in fearful contexts.

Introduction

In The expression of the emotions in man and animals, Darwin emphasized the functional value of facial expressions and asserted that these expressions and their functions may be conserved across evolution [1]. Since then, others have continued to characterize the facial expressions of humans [2], nonhuman primates [3], canids [4] and rodents [5], [6].

Facial expressions are capable of conveying emotions [7] and/or intentions [8], providing useful information during social interactions. Many types of information are available in social contexts including tactile, acoustic, olfactory and visual signals. In social interactions of mice, visual signals are generally considered secondary to olfactory information [9]. For example, male mice will attack intact males, but will not attack females or castrated males that enter their territory. However, if urine from an intact male is placed on a female or a castrated male, these animals will be attacked by the male territory owner [10]. Similarly, female urine placed on a male will decrease attack by the male territory owner and can also induce sexual behavior [10], [11].

While olfaction has been shown to be critical in social interactions of mice [9], [12], [13], the role of visual signals, such as facial expressions, remains unclear. Langford et al. recently (2010) described a coding system, the Mouse Grimace Scale, for measuring facial changes in response to pain [5]. They showed that mice displayed a ‘pain face’ when exposed to various noxious stimuli. In addition, they suggested that the facial changes induced by pain mediate the preference shown by females to be near familiar mice in pain [14], implying a communicative function for mouse facial expressions [5].

The current study investigated the facial expressions of mice in non-social, social and predator contexts. For each experimental context, facial expressions of mice were assessed in a pretest trial and were then immediately assessed in a test trial, where experimental stimuli were introduced. Facial expressions scored from the pretest and test trials were compared. To determine if facial changes occur in response to stimulation of the mystacial vibrissae, mice were tested in a vibrissae contact test [15]. To determine if facial changes occur in social contexts, mice were tested in a social proximity test [16] and a resident–intruder test [17], [18]. To determine if facial changes occur in response to predator stimuli, mice were tested in a cat odor exposure test [19], [20], [21] and a rat exposure test [22].

Section snippets

Animals

Subjects were 150 to 180-day-old, male, CD-1 mice (n = 18, except the resident–intruder test where n = 9 per resident and intruder groups) bred in-house from stock received from Charles River (Hollister, CA, USA). Mice were reared with same sex littermates in polycarbonate cages (39.8 cm L × 21.5 cm W × 17.8 cm H) and isolated 10 days before testing. Food and water were available ad libitum. Mouse colonies were contained within the animal facilities at the University of Hawaii in a room with controlled

Results

When a medium bristle brush made contact with the mystacial vibrissae (Fig. 2a), mice displayed changes to all facial components measured. Mice showed tightened eyes [t(17) = 9.16, p < 0.0001], flattened ears [t(17) = 3.04, p < 0.0001], nose swells [t(17) = 3.78, p < 0.0001] and cheek swells [t(17) = 2.43, p < 0.0001] in the test trial when compared to the pretest trial.

Discussion

Facial expressions are displayed by many animals [3], [4], [5], [6] and these expressions can have various functions [23], [24], [25]. The display and use of facial expressions in rodents has yet to be characterized; although, a previous study showed that mice displayed consistent facial changes while in pain [5]. The current study investigated facial expressions in mice when presented with non-social, social, and predator stimuli. The results of this study indicated that two patterns of facial

Acknowledgement

The present study was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) grant MH081845-01A2 to RJB.

References (33)

  • C. Darwin

    The expression of the emotions in man and animals

    (1873)
  • P. Ekman et al.

    Facial action coding system: A technique for the measurement of facial movement

    (1978)
  • R.J. Andrew

    The origin and evolution of the calls and facial expressions of the primates

    Behaviour

    (1963)
  • M.W. Fox

    A comparative study of the development of facial expressions in canids; wolf, coyote and foxes

    Behaviour

    (1970)
  • D.J. Langford et al.

    Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse

    Nat Methods

    (2010)
  • S.G. Sotocinal et al.

    The Rat Grimace Scale: a partially automated method for quantifying pain in the laboratory rat via facial expressions

    Mol Pain

    (2011)
  • Cited by (68)

    • Pain Recognition in Rodents

      2023, Veterinary Clinics of North America - Exotic Animal Practice
    • Body language signals for rodent social communication

      2021, Current Opinion in Neurobiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      These facial interactions are involved in the control of ‘lazy’ workers [19] and help maintain reproductive suppression [20]. A landmark study found that when an intruder mouse was placed into the cage of the resident mouse, the two mice displayed two different facial expressions, which they maintained, even during fighting: The resident displayed tightened eyes and flattened ears, while the intruder displayed widened eyes, erect ears and an open mouth [21••] (Figure 1c). A recent study found that it was possible to train an image classifier to distinguish between facial expressions in head fixed mice in a wide range of situations (aversive and palatable tastants, LiCl-indcued nausea, painful electric shock, freezing) [22•] (Figure 1d).

    • The development and use of facial grimace scales for pain measurement in animals

      2020, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
      Citation Excerpt :

      It is perfectly conceivable, of course, that facial grimacing in rodents does not solely serve a communicative function. It has been speculated that facial expressions may rather serve a protective function (Andrew, 1963; Darwin, 1872), and certain pain-relevant AUs (eye tightening and ear flattening) are strongly influenced by the potential for aggressive facial contact (Defensor et al., 2012). Facial grimacing may simply accompany whole-body responses to pain, or may actually serve to diminish the pain itself (Frida, 2002).

    • Spontaneous pain-associated facial expression and efficacy of clinically used drugs in the reserpine-induced rat model of fibromyalgia

      2019, European Journal of Pharmacology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The reason is because many compounds, which were assessed only with evoked-pain associated measures such as the PWT, do not achieve successful relief from chronic pain in patients (Blackburn-Munro, 2004; Nagakura, 2017; Negus et al., 2006; Percie Du Sert and Rice 2014; Rice et al., 2008). Previous studies suggest that the RGS scores are influenced by not only pain but also emotional arousal, e.g. fear and anxiety (Defensor et al., 2012; Senko et al., 2017). Indeed, in the present study, diazepam significantly affected the RGS score in healthy rats possibly by its sedative effect from the fact that it causes sedation at the high dose, i.e., 10 mg/kg i.p. (Shephard and Broadhurst, 1982).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text