Rodent model of infant attachment learning and stress.
ABSTRACT Here we review the neurobiology of infant odor learning in rats, and discuss the unique role of the stress hormone corticosterone (CORT) in the learning necessary for the developing rat. During the first 9 postnatal (PN) days, infants readily learn odor preferences, while aversion and fear learning are attenuated. Such restricted learning may ensure that pups only approach their mother. This sensitive period of preference learning overlaps with the stress hyporesponsive period (SHRP, PN4-14) when pups have a reduced CORT response to most stressors. Neural underpinnings responsible for sensitive-period learning include increased activity within the olfactory bulb and piriform "olfactory" cortex due to heightened release of norepinephrine from the locus coeruleus. After PN10 and with the decline of the SHRP, stress-induced CORT release permits amygdala activation and facilitates learned odor aversions and fear. Remarkably, odor preference and attenuated fear learning can be reestablished in PN10-15 pups if the mother is present, an effect due to her ability to suppress pups' CORT and amygdala activity. Together, these data indicate that functional changes in infant learning are modified by a unique interaction between the developing CORT system, the amygdala, and maternal presence, providing a learning system that becomes more flexible as pups mature.
- SourceAvailable from: Patricia Pelufo Silveira[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: During early life, a mother and her pups establish a very close relationship, and the olfactory learning of the nest odor is very important for the bond formation. The olfactory bulb (OB) is a structure that plays a fundamental role in the olfactory learning (OL) mechanism that also involves maternal behavior (licking and contact). We hypothesized that handling the pups would alter the structure of the maternal behavior, affect OL, and alter mother-pup relationships. Moreover, changes in the cyclic AMP-response element binding protein phosphorylation (CREB) and neurotrophic factors could be a part of the mechanism of these changes. This study aimed to analyze the effects of neonatal handling, 1minute per day from postpartum day 1 to 10 (PPD 1 to PPD 10), on the maternal behavior and pups' preference for the nest odor in a Y maze (PPD 11). We also tested CREB's phosphorylation and BDNF signaling in the OB of the pups (PPD 7) by Western Blot analysis. The results showed that handling alters mother-pups interaction by decreasing mother-pups contact and changing the temporal pattern of all components of the maternal behavior especially the daily licking and nest-building. We found sex-dependent changes in the nest odor preference, CREB and BDNF levels in pups OB. Male pups were more affected by alterations in the licking pattern, and female pups were more affected by changes in the mother-pup contact (the time spent outside the nest and nursing).Behavioural brain research 03/2014; · 3.22 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Over half a century of converging clinical and animal research indicates that early life experiences induce enduring neuroplasticity of the HPA-axis and the developing brain. This experience-induced neuroplasticity is due to alterations in the frequency and intensity of stimulation of pups' sensory systems (i.e., olfactory, somatosensory, gustatory) embedded in mother-infant interactions. This stimulation provides "hidden regulators" of pups' behavioral, physiological, and neural responses that have both immediate and enduring consequences, including those involving the stress response. While variation in stimulation can produce individual differences and adaptive behaviors, pathological early life experiences can induce maladaptive behaviors, initiate a pathway to pathology, and increase risk for later-life psychopathologies, such as mood and affective disorders, suggesting that infant-attachment relationships program later-life neurobehavioral function. Recent evidence suggests that the effects of maternal presence or absence during this sensory stimulation provide a major modulatory role in neural and endocrine system responses, which have minimal impact on pups' immediate neurobehavior but a robust impact on neurobehavioral development. This concept is reviewed here using two complementary rodent models of infant trauma within attachment: infant paired-odor-shock conditioning (mimicking maternal odor attachment learning) and rearing with an abusive mother that converge in producing a similar behavioral phenotype in later-life including depressive-like behavior as well as disrupted HPA-axis and amygdala function. The importance of maternal social presence on pups' immediate and enduring brain and behavior suggests unique processing of sensory stimuli in early life that could provide insight into the development of novel strategies for prevention and therapeutic interventions for trauma experienced with the abusive caregiver.Frontiers in Endocrinology 01/2014; 5:33.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Childhood maltreatment is associated with adverse brain development and later life psychiatric disorders, with maltreatment from the caregiver inducing a particular vulnerability to later life psychopathologies. Here we review two complementary rodent models of early life abuse, which are used to examine the infant response to trauma within attachment and the developmental trajectories that lead to later life neurobehavioral deficits. These rodent models include being reared with an abusive mother, and a more controlled attachment-learning paradigm using odor-shock conditioning to produce a new maternal odor. In both of these rodent models, pups learn a strong attachment and preference to the maternal odor. However, both models produce similar enduring neurobehavioral deficits, which emerge with maturation. Importantly, cues associated with our models of abuse serve as paradoxical safety signals, by normalizing enduring neurobehavioral deficits following abuse. Here we review these models and explore implications for human interventions for early life maltreatment. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Dev Psychobiol 9999: XX–XX, 2014.Developmental Psychobiology 04/2014; · 2.60 Impact Factor
Rodent Model of Infant
Attachment Learning and Stress
Tania L. Roth3
Regina M. Sullivan1,2
1Emotional Brain Institute
Nathan Kline Institute for
Psychiatric Research and Child
& Adolescent Psychiatry
New York University School of Medicine
140 Old Orangeburg Road
Orangeburg, NY 10962
2Department of Zoology
University of Oklahoma
3Department of Neurobiology and
Evelyn F. McKnight Brain Institute
University of Alabama at Birmingham
ABSTRACT: Here we review the neurobiology of infant odor learning in rats, and
discuss the unique role of the stress hormone corticosterone (CORT) in the learning
necessary for the developing rat. During the first 9 postnatal (PN) days, infants
readily learn odor preferences, while aversion and fear learning are attenuated.
Such restricted learning may ensure that pups only approach their mother. This
sensitive period of preference learning overlaps with the stress hyporesponsive
period (SHRP, PN4–14) when pups have a reduced CORT response to most
stressors. Neural underpinnings responsible for sensitive-period learning include
increased activity within the olfactory bulb and piriform ‘‘olfactory’’ cortex due to
heightened release of norepinephrine from the locus coeruleus. After PN10 and with
the decline of the SHRP, stress-induced CORT release permits amygdala activation
and facilitates learned odor aversions and fear. Remarkably, odor preference and
attenuated fear learning can be reestablished in PN10–15 pups if the mother is
present, an effect due to her ability to suppress pups’ CORTand amygdala activity.
Together, these data indicate that functional changes in infant learning are modified
by a unique interaction between the developing CORT system, the amygdala, and
maternal presence, providing a learning system that becomes more flexible as pups
mature. ? 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Dev Psychobiol 52: 651–660, 2010.
Keywords: mother–infant interactions; olfactory bulb; norepinephrine; attach-
ment; imprinting; locus coeruleus; amygdala; learning; classical
conditioning; corticosterone; stress; fear
‘‘There is continuity in development, such that the
organization at one stage provides the basis for
organization at the next succeeding stage. This
does not mean, however, that all processes persist
throughout life, nor does it mean that behaviors
must remain stable across stages. On the contrary,
development is essentially a dynamic process that
promotes reorganization and adaptation across
exquisitely designed to identify, learn, and remember
experiences with their caregivers. Indeed, infants readily
learn an attraction to their mother’s odor, which ensures
that infants will exhibit approach behaviors toward the
mother in order to receive the food, protection, and
warmth needed for survival. Perinatal learning of
maternal odor is required forpups to approach the mother
and attach to her nipples for nursing (Pedersen & Blass,
1982), though somatosensory cues from the nipple are
also required for these behaviors (Polan & Hofer, 1999;
Stern, 1997). The maternal odor continues to be learned
throughout the postnatal period (Cheslock, Varlinskaya,
Petrov, & Spear, 2000; Pedersen, Williams, & Blass,
1982), presumably since the mother’s odor can be altered
with her diet (Leon, 1992). Overall, infant behavior is
Kaner, 1980; Leon, 1992), and, as will be discussed here,
this early attachment process is facilitated by infants’
enhanced ability to learn preferences and their decreased
ability to learn aversions or fear. Presumably, this
constrains infants to form only preferences to caretakers.
Received 24 November 2010; Accepted 25 June 2010
This article is a contribution to a Special Issue of Developmental
Psychobiology, 52(7), 2010, entitled ‘‘Seymour Levine’s Legacy: The
Infant’s World and its Consequences.’’
Tania L. Roth’s present address is Department of Psychology,
University of Delaware, Newark, DE.
Correspondence to: S. Moriceau
Published online 20 August 2010 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI 10.1002/dev.20482
? 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Such attachment learning has a wide phylogenetic
representation and appears to enable altricial animals to
easily form a repertoire of proximity-seeking behaviors
toward the primary caregiver, regardless of the quality of
care they receive. For example, in avian imprinting, a
chick will continue to follow its caregiver even while
being shocked (Hess, 1962; Salzen, 1970). A similar
experiment in dogs has shown that puppies will display
strong attachment to a handler who provides rough
treatment or neglect (Rajecki, Lamb, & Obmascher,
1978). Additionally, nonhuman primates and human
children will also demonstrate strong attachment to an
abusive caregiver (Harlow & Harlow, 1965; Helfer,
Kempe, & Krugman, 1997; Maestripieri, Tomaszycki, &
Carroll, 1999; Sanchez, Ladd, & Plotsky, 2001).
We have hypothesized that the infant rat learning
system is designed to ensure that pups will learn an
approach response towards and preference for the
mother, regardless of whether she is associated with
pain or pleasure (Hofer & Sullivan, 2001). We refer
to this period of attachment learning as the ‘‘sensitive
period.’’ Furthermore, it is worthwhile to note that
postpartum mothers of various mammalian species also
display a sensitive period for learning about offspring
(Brennan & Keverne, 1997; Insel & Young, 2001;
Keverne & de la Riva, 1982; Marlier, Schaal, &
Soussignan, 1998; Moffat, Suh, & Fleming, 1993; Okere
& Kaba, 2000; Pissonnier, Thiery, Fabre-Nys, Poindron,
& Keverne, 1985). Much like that of the infant, mother
learning requires unique neural circuitry to facilitate odor
preferences, approach responses, and nurturing behavior
toward offspring (Brennan & Keverne, 1997; Insel &
Young, 2001; Le ´vy, Gervais, Kindermann, Orgeur, &
In just 3 short weeks, rat pups are transformed into
independent organisms with the maturation and experi-
ence to survive on their own. These 3 weeks represent
a time of transition from maternal dependence to
independence that uniquely characterizes the dramatic
reorganization and adaptation of learning required of the
infant. In this review, we discuss the neural basis that
enables pups to transition between readily learning
preferences within the context of attachment to learning
fear. One prominent characteristic of learning after
postnatal day (PN) 10 is the amygdala’s dependence
on stress-induced corticosterone (CORT) release. Indeed,
the ontogeny of infant stress responsiveness and the
hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) system develop-
ment were two major foci of Seymour Levine’s devel-
opmental work. As will be evident below, Levine’s
contributions to developmental psychobiology have
certainly been instrumental in helping us understand
the neurobehavioral basis of infant attachment and the
ontogeny of fear learning.
NEUROBIOLOGY OF INFANT RAT ODOR
During the infant sensitive period, PN1–9, pups display
an enhanced capacity for preference learning. We have
shown that learned odor preferences (conditioned via
either positive or aversive stimuli paired with an
unfamiliar odor) during this period are in part due to
strong noradrenergic input to the olfactory bulb from the
locus coeruleus (LC). Infant acquisition (learning) is
disrupted if norepinephrine (NE) receptors are blocked in
the bulb (Sullivan, Zyzak, Skierkowski, & Wilson, 1992)
or if the LC is pharmacologically destroyed (Sullivan,
Wilson, Lemon, & Gerhardt, 1994). Presentations of an
odor with the activation of olfactory bulb NE b-receptors
produce odor preference learning (Sullivan, Stackenwalt,
Neve, & McLean, 2003). Additionally, we have shown
that NE is required for the maintenance of the prolonged
mitral cell response characteristic of sensitive-period
learning (Wilson, Sullivan, & Leon, 1987).
Unique properties of the LC appear to be responsible
for infant preference learning. In effect, the LC of a
sensitive-period pup is characterized by prolonged
stimulus-evoked excitation, which prompts release of an
enormous amount of NE (Nakamura, Kimura, & Saka-
guchi, 1987). This isin contrast tothe LC of an older pup,
in which there is a much shorter evoked physiological
response and thus smaller release ofNE(Nakamuraetal.,
the sensitive period is associated with the functional
emergence of LC a2 inhibitory autoreceptors and the
downregulation of LC a1 excitatory autoreceptors
(Nakamura et al., 1987; Pieribone, Nicholas, Dagerlind,
& Hokfelt, 1994; Scheinin et al., 1994). To test whether
these developmental changes in LC autoreceptors are
important for ending pups’ rapid preference learning,
we recreated neonatal levels of these LC autoreceptors’
activity in older pups to reproduce the largeNE release of
younger pups. Specifically, after stimulating the LC with
intra-LC cholinergic infusion, combined with drugs that
blocked the autoinhibition (a2 antagonists) and enhanced
the autoexcitation (a1 agonists), we successfully rein-
(Moriceau & Sullivan, 2004b). These data suggest that
functional changes in the LC support termination of the
rapid and robust preference learning period.
Though early-life learning is characterized by odor
preference learning, infants during this developmental
readily learn an odor preference even when an unfamiliar
odor has been paired with an aversive stimulus, such as
Moriceau, Roth, and Sullivan
.5mA foot-shock or tail pinch (Camp & Rudy, 1988;
Haroutunian & Campbell, 1979; Moriceau & Sullivan,
2006; Moriceau, Wilson, Levine, & Sullivan, 2006; Roth
& Sullivan, 2005; Spear, 1978; Sullivan & Hall, 1988;
Sullivan, Hofer, & Brake, 1986; Sullivan, Landers,
Yeaman, & Wilson, 2000). At the end of the sensitive
period, similarly to older animals, pups readily learn to
avoid unfamiliar odors paired with the same aversive
stimuli (Blozovski & Cudennec, 1980; Camp & Rudy,
1988; Collier, Mast, Meyer, & Jacobs, 1979; Goldman &
Tobach, 1967; Haroutunian & Campbell, 1979; Moriceau
& Sullivan, 2006; Moriceau et al., 2006; Myslivecek,
1997; Stehouwer & Campbell, 1978; Sullivan, Landers,
et al., 2000).
Shock-induced preference learning during the sensi-
tive period is likely not due to the pups’ inability to feel
pain since unconditioned responses to shock vary little
Spear, 1985; Fitzgerald, 2005; Shair, Masmela, Brunelli,
& Hofer, 1997; Stehouwer & Campbell, 1978; Sullivan,
Landers, et al., 2000). Also, pups’ inability to learn
aversions or fear is not limited to olfactory-cued fear
conditioning, as other learning paradigms that produce
learned fear in older animals (such as passive avoidance
and inhibitory conditioning) do not readily do so in infant
rats (Bialik, Pappas, & Roberts, 1984; Blozovski &
Cudennec, 1980; Camp & Rudy, 1988; Collier & Mast,
1979; Myslivecek, 1997).
Due to the known role of the amygdala in supporting
learned fear in older animals (Cahill, Weinberger,
Roozendaal, & McGaugh, 1999; Debiec & LeDoux,
2006; Fanselow & Gale, 2003; Fanselow & LeDoux,
Doyere, Cain, & LeDoux, 2007), we have examined
whether the amygdala mediates the developmental
transition that permits pups’ emergence of avoidance
uptake and cfos immunohistochemistry), we have found
that the amygdala only appears to be involved in odor-
shock conditioning when this conditioning is able to
support odor avoidance acquisition—that is, when the
sensitiveperiod has ended (Moriceau et al., 2006; Roth &
Sullivan, 2005; Sullivan,Landers,etal., 2000; Sullivan&
Wilson, 1993, 2003).
As further evidence of its limited role in infant
induced conditioned odor preference (Moriceau et al.,
2006; Sullivan & Wilson, 1993). In contrast, amygdala
lesions in older pups prevent them from learning a
conditioned odor aversion (Maren, 1999; Moriceau et al.,
ability of sensitive-period pups to exhibit amygdala long-
term depression (LTD) furthersuggests thattheamygdala
is not participating in infant learning (Thompson,
Sullivan, & Wilson, 2008). Altogether, these data suggest
that the lack of amygdala participation in circuitry
mediating sensitive-period learning is key to an infant’s
increased capacity to learn a preference. While we first
& Morys, 2000; Berdel, Morys, & Maciejewska, 1997;
Bhattacharyya, & Benes, 2002; Morys, Berdel, Jagalska-
Majewska, & Luczynska, 1999; Nair & Gonzalez-Lima,
1999) was responsible for its lack of participation,
recent studies have since suggested that the amygdala
is sufficiently mature to respond to stimuli during the
sensitive period (Thompson et al., 2008). Rather, it is
increasing CORT levels that play a crucial role in the
emergence of fear learning and in the participation of
the amygdala after the sensitive period (Barr et al.,
2009; Moriceau & Sullivan, 2006; Moriceau et al., 2006;
Shionoya, Moriceau, Bradstock, & Sullivan, 2007;
CORTICOSTERONE, AMYGDALA ACTIVITY,
AND THE ONTOGENY OF FEAR
Our interest in CORT was initiated by two areas of
research. First, work showing that pups’ ontogenetic
at the same age as learned fear (?PN10) and is controlled
preference/attachment learning overlaps with an infant
which pups’ CORT levels are lower than normal and
remain either unaffected or are minimally increased by
stressors (Grino, Paulmyer-Lacroix, Faudon, Renard, &
Anglade, 1994; Levine, 2001; Rosenfeld, Suchecki, &
Interestingly, CORT response is functional at birth
(Arai & Widmaier, 1991; Martin, Cake, Hartmann, &
provided by the mother during nursing and grooming
seems to control the pups’ low CORT levels (Levine,
1962; Stanton & Levine, 1990; Van Oers, De Kloet,
Whelan, & Levine, 1998). Indeed, sensitive-period pups
show increases in CORT in response to intense stressors
be returned to normal low levels with replacement of
maternal sensory stimulation or maternal presence
(Avishai-Eliner, Yi, Newth, & Baram, 1995; Levine,
2001; Walker, Scribner, Cascio, & Dallman, 1991).
Additionally, functional CORT receptors are already
Developmental Psychobiology Attachment, Stress, and Learning
present throughout the brain, including within the
amygdala (Alexis, Kitraki, Spanou, Stylianopoulou, &
Sekeris, 1990; Diorio, Viau, & Meaney, 1993; Kitraki,
Alexis, Papalopoulou, & Stylianopoulou, 1996; Rose-
nfeld, van Eekelen, Levine, & de Kloet, 1993).
Studies utilizing presentations of predator odor have
helped provide a causal link between CORTresponsivity,
amygdala activation, and the ontogeny of natural or
unlearned fear. We and others have shown that during the
SHRP, predator-odor presentations fail to elicit a CORT
Tanapat, & Cameron, 1997; Moriceau, Roth, Okotog-
haide, & Sullivan, 2004; Takahashi, 1994; Wiedenmayer
& Barr, 2001; Wiedenmayer, Magarinos, McEwen, &
Barr, 2005). Furthermore, these researchers showed that
increasing neonatal CORT levels prior to presentation of
of CORT in older pups blocks amygdala responsivity to
the male odor presentations, and thus fear expression.
Together, these data highlight the importance of CORTin
changes in the developing CORT system facilitate the
transition between sensitive-period preference learning
and postsensitive-period fear conditioning.
To investigate this relationship, we gave sensitive-
period pups either systemic or intra-amygdala CORT
either of these approaches enabled sensitive-period pups
to learn an odor aversion. As summarized in Table 1,
neural assessment of their brains by 2-deoxyglucose
uptake indicated that the learning had evoked significant
activity within the amygdala (Sullivan, Landers, et al.,
2000).Inturn,we canextendthe ageatwhich odor-shock
conditioning produces an odor preference and prevent
amygdala activity by eliminating endogenous CORT in
older pups, through either removal of its source, the
adrenal glands, or administration of the CORT receptor
antagonist, RU 38486 (Moriceau & Sullivan, 2004a,
2006). Preventing the increase of CORT by adrenalec-
tomy has also been shown to delay the emergence of
learned fear with aversive conditioning (Bialik et al.,
1984; Collier etal.,1979).Thisdevelopmentaleffectisin
sharp contrast to CORT effects on learning in adults,
where it only modifies how well a behavior is learned
(Corodimas, LeDoux, Gold, & Schulkin, 1994; Pugh,
and the consequent lack of significant amygdala activity
during the sensitive period appear to prevent pups from
learning aversions or avoidances to odors associated with
the mother. Levine and his colleagues have demonstrated
that sensory stimulation from the mother is responsible
for maintaining low CORT levels during the SHRP
stimulationduringthe SHRP,suchasthat occurring when
of time (24hr), produces significant elevations in CORT
levels (Levine, 2001). Aberrant maternal care in the rat
will produce similar effects (Gilles, Schultz, & Baram,
1996). Furthermore, maternal presence in older pups
(>PN12) can blunt CORTrelease to stressful and painful
stimuli (Stanton & Levine, 1990; Stanton, Wallstrom, &
Table 1. Odor-Shock Conditioning in Rat Pups
Sensitive period (PN1–9) Conditional sensitive period (PN10–15)
CORT increase (systemic
or intra-amygdala CORT)Saline
CORT reduction (maternal presence,
adrenalectomy, amygdala CORT
Anterior piriform cortex
Posterior piriform cortex
Note. The table summarizes our understanding of the brain regions supporting sensitive period (PN1–9) odor preference learning and conditional
measured by 2-deoxyglucose uptake within the olfactory bulb and anterior piriform ‘‘olfactory’’ cortex. There is no significant activity within the
with significant activity within the amygdala and posterior piriform cortex. Maternal presence during odor-shock conditioning in PN12 pups decreases
responsivity,andpermitsodorpreference learning.Note,thisisthesameneuralcircuitryresponsibleforPN8preferencelearning(Moriceau& Sullivan,
2006; Moriceau et al., 2006; Raineki, Shionoya, Sander, & Sullivan, 2009; Sullivan, Landers, et al., 2000). PN¼postnatal day.
Moriceau, Roth, and Sullivan
Levine, 1987; Suchecki, Rosenfeld, & Levine, 1993).
remarkable ability of the mother to suppress CORTlevels
even during stress in PN14 and PN21 pups. The sensory
cues capable ofbluntingthe stress-inducedCORTrelease
appear to be olfactory and somatosensory (Barr et al.,
2009; Moriceau & Sullivan, 2006; Shionoya et al., 2007;
Stanton & Levine, 1990; Suchecki et al., 1993; Wieden-
in CORT levels due to social sensory cues has since been
referred to as ‘‘social buffering’’ (Hennessy, Kaiser, &
Sachser, 2009; Kikusui, Winslow, & Mori, 2006), and
has been shown to exist in humans and other animals
(DeVries, Glasper, & Detillion, 2003; Kirschbaum,
Klauer, Filipp, & Hellhammer, 1995; Thorsteinsson &
The finding that maternal presence blunts CORT
release to stressful and painful stimuli in older pups
(Stanton & Levine, 1990; Stanton et al., 1987; Suchecki
et al., 1993), prompted us to examine whether maternal
presence in older pups (PN10–15) is capable of
We found that indeed maternal presence blocked fear
learning (aversion) in response to odor-shock condition-
ing, as well as prevented significant amygdala activation
and permitted significant olfactory bulb activation
(Moriceau & Sullivan, 2006). Furthermore, systemic or
intra-amygdalaCORTinfusions allowedthe pupstolearn
odor aversions in the presence of the mother (Moriceau
& Sullivan, 2006). As depicted in Table 1, our results
indicate that maternal presence in PN10–15 pups
reengages the attachment circuitry during learning,
effectively preventing them from acquiring an odor
aversion or fear. The ability of maternal presence to
reengagethe attachmentcircuitryappears toendatPN15,
as PN16 pups still learn an odor aversion even in the
presence of the mother (Upton & Sullivan, 2010). Based
upon these data, we now define PN10–15 as a ‘‘condi-
tional sensitive period,’’ in which odor preference
learning and attenuated fear learning can be reestablished
if the mother is present.
To summarize, the brain of the developing infant rat is
circuitry providing remarkable constraints on aversion
and fear learning. The ecological significance of this may
relate to the possible occurrence of rough handling by
the mother during normal mother–infant interactions
(i.e., stepping on pups while entering/leaving the nest and
rough pup retrieval). From an evolutionary perspective,
it would be maladaptive for pups to learn to avoid the
maternal odor in a situation where the mother is required
for milk and warmth, suggesting that this attenuated
avoidance learning ensures that pups continue to only
approach/follow the caregiver (Hofer & Sullivan, 2001).
pups are still dependent on the mother but can begin
demonstrate avoidance and fear learning to aversive
stimuli in the absence of the mother. However, the
attachment circuitry and restraint on fear learning can
be reengaged during this transitional period if the mother
is present. This suggests that older pups have a more
sophisticated learning system that enables them to
respond appropriately to learning situations dependent
on whether the mother is present or not. The data
summarized here make it clear that the ontogeny of pups’
dramatic reorganization and adaptation of learning
necessary for the developing rat.
Seymour Levine, one of the first to study the role of early
experiences in shaping stress responses, has left a lasting
response to .5mA foot-shock were measured in PN8, PN14, or
PN21 pups with or without maternal presence to assess the
ontogeny of social buffering. Immediately following 11 shock
presentations with an interval of 4min (between 12 and 2 pm),
pups were anesthetized with pentobarbital and blood was taken
from the hearts’ventricle. Shock elicits a significant increase in
(PN8). Maternal presence in PN14 and PN21 pups prevents the
her from interfering with the shock administration, as well as to
control for maternal behavior and milk letdown. The pups were,
however, free to contact the mother. Stress¼foot-shock;
Ontogeny of CORT levels. CORT levels in
Attachment, Stress, and Learning
legacy regarding the profound influence of the mother on
the development of the stress system in numerous species
(Levine, 1957, 1967; Lyons, Martel, Levine, Risch, &
Schatzberg, 1999; Morgado et al., 2008; Schmidt et al.,
2006; Stanton et al., 1987). The data outlined in this
review indicate that functional changes in infant learning
are modified by a unique interaction between the
context that depends on whether the mother is present or
While human children show remarkably similar
behavior within the realm of attachment (proximity
seeking, tolerance of pain), it is unclear if the rat
Bowlby’s (1965) use of the animal literature in the
construction of his attachment theory would argue the
likely evolutionary conservation of attachment circuitry.
Following this, it is likely the case that the humaninfant’s
brain is similarly organized to ensure rapid, robust
attachment to his or her caregiver.
The importance of a healthy and secure attachment in
humans is illustrated by the fact that securely attached
children have an increased probability of maturing into
mentally healthy adults compared to insecurely attached
children (Dozier, Peloso, Lewis, Laurenceau, & Levine,
2008; Gunnar & Quevedo, 2008). Conversely, children in
abusive attachment relationships have a greater proba-
bility of experiencing adult mental problems (Glaser,
of brain development, and it is clear that the brains’ HPA
axis and amygdala are particularly vulnerable to early
environmental influences (Dent, Smith, & Levine, 2001;
Eghbal-Ahmadi, Avishai-Eliner, Hatalski, & Baram,
1999; Francis, Caldji, Champagne, Plotsky, & Meaney,
1999; Swiergiel, Takahashi, & Kalin, 1993). Based upon
the data reviewed here, developmental insults to these
learning processes responsible for securing attachment,
thus increasing the risk for poor mental outcomes.
This work was funded by grants NIH DC009910, NSF
IOB0850527 to RMS and a Young Investigator Award from
the National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and
Depression to TLR.
Alexis, M. N., Kitraki, E., Spanou, K., Stylianopoulou, F., &
Sekeris, C. E. (1990). Ontogeny of the glucocorticoid
receptor in the rat brain. Advances in Experimental Medicine
Biology, 265, 269–276.
Arai, M., & Widmaier, E. P. (1991). Activation of the pituitary-
adrenocortical axis in day-old rats by insulin-induced
hypoglycemia. Endocrinology, 129, 1505–1512.
Avishai-Eliner, S., Yi, S. J., Newth, C. J., & Baram, T. Z.
(1995). Effects of maternal and sibling deprivation on basal
and stress induced hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal compo-
nents in the infant rat. Neuroscience Letters, 192, 49–52.
Barr, G. A. (1995). Ontogeny of nociception and antinocicep-
tion. NIDA Research Monograph, 158, 172–201.
Barr, G. A., Moriceau, S., Shionoya, K., Muzny, K., Gao, P.,
Wang, S., et al. (2009). Transitions in infant learning are
modulated by dopamine in the amygdala. Nature Neuro-
science, 12, 1367–1369.
Berdel, B., & Morys, J. (2000). Expression of calbindin-D28k
and parvalbumin during development of rat’s basolateral
amygdaloid complex. International Journal of Developmen-
tal Neuroscience, 18, 501–513.
Berdel, B., Morys, J., & Maciejewska, B. (1997). Neuronal
changes in the basolateral complex during development of
the amygdala of the rat. International Journal of Devel-
opmental Neuroscience, 15, 755–765.
Bialik, R. J., Pappas, B. A., & Roberts, D. C. (1984). Deficits in
conditioned avoidance responding following adrenalectomy
and central norepinephrine depletion are dependent on
postsurgical recovery period and phase of the diurnal cycle.
Behavioral Neuroscience, 98, 847–857.
Blozovski, D., & Cudennec, A. (1980). Passive avoidance
learning in the young rat. Developmental Psychobiology, 13,
Bouwmeester, H., Wolterink, G., & van Ree, J. M. (2002).
Neonatal development of projections from the basolateral
amygdala to prefrontal, striatal, and thalamic structures in the
rat. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 442, 239–249.
Bowlby, J. (1965). Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Brennan, P. A., & Keverne, E. B. (1997). Neural mechanisms
of mammalian olfactory learning. Progress in Neurobiology,
Cahill, L., Weinberger, N. M., Roozendaal, B., & McGaugh, J.
L. (1999). Is the amygdala a locus of ‘‘conditioned fear’’?
Some questions and caveats. Neuron, 23, 227–228.
Camp, L. L., & Rudy, J. W. (1988). Changes in the
categorization of appetitive and aversive events during
postnatal development of the rat. Developmental Psycho-
biology, 21, 25–42.
Cheslock, S. J., Varlinskaya, E. I., Petrov, E. S., & Spear, N. E.
(2000). Rapid and robust olfactory conditioning with milk
before suckling experience: Promotion of nipple attachment
in the newborn rat. Behavioral Neuroscience, 114, 484–495.
Collier, A., & Bolles, R. C. (1980). The ontogenesis of
defensive reactions to shock in preweanling rats. Devel-
opmental Psychobiology, 13, 141–150.
Collier, A., & Mast, J. (1979). Alleviation of avoidance deficits
by approach alternatives in 10-day old rats. Physiology &
Behavior, 23, 615–618.
Collier, A., Mast, J., Meyer, D. R., & Jacobs, C. E. (1979).
Approach-avoidance conflict in preweanling rats: A devel-
opmental study. Animal Learning and Behavior, 7, 514–520.
Moriceau, Roth, and Sullivan
Corodimas, K. P., LeDoux, J. E., Gold, P. W., & Schulkin, J.
(1994). Corticosterone potentiation of conditioned fear in
rats. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 746,
Cunningham, M. G., Bhattacharyya, S., & Benes, F. M. (2002).
Amygdalo-cortical sprouting continues into early adulthood:
Implications for the development of normal and abnormal
function during adolescence. Journal of Comparative Neu-
rology, 453, 116–130.
Debiec, J., & LeDoux, J. E. (2006). Noradrenergic signaling in
the amygdala contributes to the reconsolidation of fear
memory: Treatment implications for PTSD. Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences, 1071, 521–524.
Dent, G. W., Smith, M. A., & Levine, S. (2001). Stress-induced
alterations in locus coeruleus gene expression during
ontogeny. Brain Research. Developmental Brain Research,
DeVries, A. C., Glasper, E. R., & Detillion, C. E. (2003). Social
modulation of stress responses. Physiology & Behavior, 79,
Diorio, D., Viau, V., & Meaney, M. J. (1993). The role of the
medial prefrontal cortex (cingulate gyrus) in the regulation of
hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal responses to stress. Journal
of Neuroscience, 13, 3839–3847.
Dozier, M., Peloso, E., Lewis, E., Laurenceau, J. P., & Levine,
S. (2008). Effects of an attachment-based intervention on the
cortisol production of infants and toddlers in foster care.
Development & Psychopathology, 20, 845–859.
Eghbal-Ahmadi, M., Avishai-Eliner, S., Hatalski, C. G., &
Baram, T. Z. (1999). Differential regulation of the expression
of corticotropin-releasing factor receptor type 2 (CRF2) in
hypothalamus and amygdala of the immature rat by sensory
input and food intake. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 3982–
Emerich, D. F., Scalzo, F. M., Enters, E. K., Spear, N. E., &
Spear, L. P. (1985). Effects of 6-hydroxydopamine-induced
catecholamine depletion on shock-precipitated wall climbing
of infant rat pups. Developmental Psychobiology, 18, 215–
Fanselow, M. S., & Gale, G. D. (2003). The amygdala, fear, and
memory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 985,
Fanselow, M. S., & LeDoux, J. E. (1999). Why we think
plasticity underlying Pavlovian fear conditioning occurs in
the basolateral amygdala. Neuron, 23, 229–232.
Fitzgerald, M. (2005). The development of nociceptive circuits.
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 507–520.
Francis, D. D., Caldji, C., Champagne, F., Plotsky, P. M., &
Meaney, M. J. (1999). The role of corticotropin-releasing
factor—Norepinephrine systems in mediating the effects of
early experience on the development of behavioral and
endocrine responses to stress. Biological Psychiatry, 46,
Galef, B. G., Jr., & Kaner, H. C. (1980). Establishment and
maintenance of preference for natural and artificial olfactory
stimuli in juvenile rats. Journal of Comparative & Physio-
logical Psychology, 94, 588–595.
Gilles, E. E., Schultz, L., & Baram, T. Z. (1996). Abnormal
corticosterone regulation in an immature rat model of
continuous chronic stress. Pediatric Neurology, 15, 114–119.
Glaser, D. (2000). Child abuse and neglect and the brain—A
review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 97–
Goldman, P. S., & Tobach, E. (1967). Behaviourmodificationin
infant rats. Animal Behaviour, 15, 559–562.
Goosens, K. A., & Maren, S. (2001). Contextual and auditory
fear conditioning are mediated by the lateral, basal, and
central amygdaloid nuclei in rats. Learning and Memory, 8,
Gould, E., Tanapat, P., & Cameron, H. A. (1997). Adrenal
steroids suppress granule cell death in the developing dentate
gyrus through an NMDA receptor-dependent mechanism.
Brain Research. Developmental Brain Research, 103,
Grino, M., Paulmyer-Lacroix, O., Faudon, M., Renard, M., &
Anglade, G. (1994). Blockade of alpha 2-adrenoceptors
stimulates basal and stress-induced adrenocorticotropin
secretion in the developing rat through a central mechanism
independent from corticotropin-releasing factor and arginine
vasopressin. Endocrinology, 135, 2549–2557.
Grossman, A. W., Churchill, J. D., McKinney, B. C., Kodish, I.
M., Otte, S. L., & Greenough, W. T. (2003). Experience
effects on brain development: Possible contributions to
psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychia-
try, 44, 33–63.
Gunnar, M. R., & Quevedo, K. M. (2008). Early care
experiences and HPA axis regulation in children: A
mechanism for later trauma vulnerability. Progress in Brain
Research, 167, 137–149.
Harlow, H. F., & Harlow, M. K. (1965). The affectional
systems. In: A. Schrier, H. F. Harlow, & F. Stollnitz (Eds.),
Behavior of nonhuman primates (Vol. 2, pp. 287–344). New
York: Academic Press.
Haroutunian, V., & Campbell, B. A. (1979). Emergence of
interoceptive and exteroceptive control of behavior in rats.
Science, 205, 927–929.
Helfer, M. E., Kempe, R. S., & Krugman, R. D. (1997). The
battered child. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hennessy, M. B., Kaiser, S., & Sachser, N. (2009). Social
buffering of the stress response: Diversity, mechanisms, and
functions. Frontiers Neuroendocrinology, 30, 470–482.
Hess, E. (1962). Ethology: An approach to the complete
analysis of behavior. In: R. Brown, E. Galanter,E. Hess, & G.
Mendler (Eds.), New directions in psychology (pp. 159–
199). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hofer, M. A., & Sullivan, R. M. (2001). Towards a neuro-
biology of attachment. In: C. A. Nelson, & M. Luciana
(Eds.), Developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 599–
616). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Insel, T. R., & Young, L. J. (2001). The neurobiology of
attachment. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 129–136.
Keverne, E. B., & de la Riva, C. (1982). Pheromones in mice:
Reciprocal interaction between the nose and brain. Nature,
Developmental Psychobiology Attachment, Stress, and Learning
Kikusui, T., Winslow, J. T., & Mori, Y. (2006). Social buffering:
Relief from stress and anxiety. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B Biology Science, 361, 2215–2228.
Kirschbaum, C., Klauer, T., Filipp, S. H., & Hellhammer, D. H.
(1995). Sex-specific effects of social support on cortisol and
subjective responses to acute psychological stress. Psycho-
somatic Medicine, 57, 23–31.
Kitraki, E., Alexis,M. N., Papalopoulou, M., & Stylianopoulou,
F. (1996). Glucocorticoid receptor gene expression in the
embryonic rat brain. Neuroendocrinology, 63, 305–317.
Leon, M. (1992). The neurobiology of filial learning. Annual
Review of Psychology, 43, 377–398.
Levine, S. (1957). Infantile experience and resistance to
physiological stress. Science, 126, 405.
Levine, S. (1962). Plasma-free corticosteroid response to
electric shock in rats stimulated in infancy. Science, 135,
Levine, S. (1967). Maternal and environmental influences on
the adrenocortical response to stress in weanling rats.
Science, 156, 258–260.
Levine, S. (1982). Comparative and psychobiological perspec-
tives on development. In: W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota
Symposia on Child Psychology, Vol. 15. The concept of
development (pp. 29–53). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Levine, S. (2001). Primary social relationships influence the
development of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis in
the rat. Physiology & Behavior, 73, 255–260.
Le ´vy, F., Gervais, R., Kindermann, U., Orgeur, P., & Piketty, V.
(1990). Importance of beta-noradrenergic receptors in the
olfactory bulb of sheep for recognition of lambs. Behavioral
Neuroscience, 104, 464–469.
Lyons, D. M., Martel, F. L., Levine, S., Risch, N. J., &
Schatzberg, A. F. (1999). Postnatal experiences and genetic
effects on squirrel monkey social affinities and emotional
distress. Hormones and Behavior, 36, 266–275.
Maestripieri, D., Tomaszycki, M., & Carroll, K. A. (1999).
Consistency and change in the behavior of rhesus macaque
abusive mothers with successive infants. Developmental
Psychobiology, 34, 29–35.
Maren, S. (1999). Neurotoxic basolateral amygdala lesions
impair learning and memory but not the performance of
conditional fear in rats. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 8696–
Maren, S. (2003). The amygdala, synaptic plasticity, and fear
memory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 985,
Marlier, L., Schaal, B., & Soussignan, R. (1998). Bottle-fed
neonates prefer an odor experienced in utero to an odor
experienced postnatally in the feeding context. Developmen-
tal Psychobiology, 33, 133–145.
Martin, C. E., Cake, M. H., Hartmann, P. E., & Cook, I. F.
(1977). Relationship between foetal corticosteroids, maternal
progesterone and parturition in the rat. Acta Endocrinology
(Copenh), 84, 167–176.
Moffat, S. D., Suh, E. J., & Fleming, A. S. (1993).
Noradrenergic involvement in the consolidation of maternal
experience in postpartum rats. Physiology & Behavior, 53,
Morgado, E., Gordon, M. K., del Carmen Minana-Solis, M.,
Meza, E., Levine, S., Escobar, C., et al. (2008). Hormonal
and metabolic rhythms associated with the daily scheduled
nursing in rabbit pups. American Journal of Physiology.
Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 295,
Moriceau, S., Roth, T. L., Okotoghaide, T., & Sullivan, R. M.
(2004). Corticosterone controls the developmental emer-
gence of fear and amygdala function to predator odors in
infant rat pups. International Journal of Developmental
Neuroscience, 22, 415–422.
Moriceau, S., & Sullivan, R. M. (2004a). Corticosterone
influences on Mammalian neonatal sensitive-period learning.
Behavioral Neuroscience, 118, 274–281.
Moriceau, S., & Sullivan, R. M. (2004b). Unique neural
circuitry for neonatal olfactory learning. Journal of Neuro-
science, 24, 1182–1189.
Moriceau, S., & Sullivan, R. M. (2006). Maternal presence
serves as a switch between learning fear and attraction in
infancy. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 1004–1006.
Moriceau, S., Wilson, D. A., Levine, S., & Sullivan, R. M.
(2006). Dual circuitry for odor-shock conditioning during
infancy: Corticosterone switches between fear and attraction
via amygdala. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 6737–6748.
Morys, J., Berdel, B., Jagalska-Majewska, H., & Luczynska, A.
(1999). The basolateral amygdaloid complex—Its develop-
ment, morphology and functions. Folia Morphologica
(Warsz), 58, 29–46.
Myslivecek, J. (1997). Inhibitory learning and memory in
newborn rats. Progress in Neurobiology, 53, 399–430.
Nair, H. P., & Gonzalez-Lima, F. (1999). Extinction of behavior
in infant rats: Development of functional coupling between
septal, hippocampal, and ventral tegmental regions. Journal
of Neuroscience, 19, 8646–8655.
Nakamura, S., Kimura, F., & Sakaguchi, T. (1987). Postnatal
development of electrical activity in the locus ceruleus.
Journal of Neurophysiology, 58, 510–524.
Okere, C. O., & Kaba, H. (2000). Increased expression of
neuronal nitric oxide synthase mRNA in the accessory
olfactory bulb during the formation of olfactory recognition
memory in mice. European Journal of Neuroscience, 12,
Pedersen, P. E., & Blass, E. M. (1982). Prenatal and postnatal
determinants of the 1st suckling episode in albino rats.
Developmental Psychobiology, 15, 349–355.
Pedersen, P. E., Williams, C. L., & Blass, E. M. (1982).
Activation and odor conditioning of suckling behavior in 3-
day-old albino rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 329–341.
Pieribone, V. A., Nicholas, A. P., Dagerlind, A., & Hokfelt, T.
(1994). Distribution of alpha 1 adrenoceptors in rat brain
revealed by in situ hybridization experiments utilizing
subtype-specific probes. Journal of Neuroscience, 14,
Pissonnier, D., Thiery, J. C., Fabre-Nys, C., Poindron, P., &
Keverne, E. B. (1985). The importance of olfactory bulb
noradrenalin formaternal recognition insheep. Physiology&
Behavior, 35, 361–363.
Moriceau, Roth, and Sullivan
Polan, H. J., & Hofer, M. A. (1999). Maternally directed
orienting behaviors of newborn rats. Developmental Psycho-
biology, 34, 269–279.
Pugh, C. R., Tremblay, D., Fleshner, M., & Rudy, J. W. (1997).
A selective role for corticosterone in contextual-fear
conditioning. Behavioral Neuroscience, 111, 503–511.
Raineki, C.,Shionoya, K.,Sander, K., &Sullivan, R. M.(2009).
Ontogeny of odor-LiCl vs. odor-shock learning: Similar
behaviors but divergent ages of functional amygdala
emergence. Learning and Memory, 16, 114–121.
Rajecki, D. W., Lamb, M. E., & Obmascher, P. (1978). Toward
a general theory of infantile attachment: A comparative
review of aspects of the social bond. Behavioral and Brain
Science, 3, 417–464.
Roozendaal, B., Carmi, O., & McGaugh, J. L. (1996).
Adrenocortical suppression blocks the memory-enhancing
effects of amphetamine and epinephrine. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 93, 1429–1433.
Rosenfeld, P., Suchecki, D., & Levine, S. (1992). Multifactorial
regulation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis dur-
ing development. Neuroscience Biobehavioral Review, 16,
Rosenfeld, P., van Eekelen, J. A., Levine, S., & de Kloet, E. R.
(1993). Ontogeny of corticosteroid receptors in the brain.
Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, 13, 295–319.
Roth, T. L., & Sullivan, R. M. (2005). Memory of early
maltreatment: Neonatal behavioral and neural correlates of
maternal maltreatment within the context of classical
conditioning. Biological Psychiatry, 57, 823–831.
Salzen, E. A. (1970). Imprinting and environmental learning.
In: L. R. Aronson, E. Tobach, D. S. Lehrman, & J.
Rosensbaltt (Eds.), Development and evolution of behavior
(pp. 158–178). San Francisco: W H Freeman.
Sanchez, M. M., Ladd, C. O., & Plotsky, P. M. (2001).
Early adverse experience as a developmental risk factor
for later psychopathology: Evidence from rodent and
primate models. Development & Psychopathology, 13,
Scheinin, M., Lomasney, J. W., Hayden-Hixson, D. M.,
Schambra, U. B., Caron, M. G., Lefkowitz, R. J., et al.
(1994). Distribution of alpha 2-adrenergic receptor subtype
gene expression in rat brain. Brain Research. Molecular
Brain Research, 21, 133–149.
Schmidt, M. V., Levine, S., Alam, S., Harbich, D., Sterlemann,
V., Ganea, K., et al. (2006). Metabolic signals modulate
maternal separation of the neonatal mouse. Journal of
Neuroendocrinology, 18, 865–874.
Shair, H. N., Masmela, J. R., Brunelli, S. A., & Hofer, M. A.
(1997). Potentiation and inhibition of ultrasonic vocalization
of rat pups: Regulation by social cues. Developmental
Psychobiology, 30, 195–200.
Shionoya, K., Moriceau, S., Bradstock, P., & Sullivan, R. M.
(2007). Maternal attenuation of hypothalamic paraventricu-
lar nucleus norepinephrine switches avoidance learning to
preference learning in preweanling rat pups. Hormones and
Behavior, 52, 391–400.
Sigurdsson, T., Doyere, V., Cain, C. K., & LeDoux, J. E. (2007).
Long-term potentiation in the amygdala: A cellular mech-
anism of fear learning and memory. Neuropharmacology, 52,
Spear, N. (1978). Processing memories: Forgetting and
retention. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stanton, M. E., & Levine, S. (1990). Inhibition of infant
glucocorticoid stress response: Specific role of maternal
cues. Developmental Psychobiology, 23, 411–426.
Stanton, M. E., Wallstrom, J., & Levine, S. (1987). Maternal
contact inhibits pituitary-adrenal stress responses in pre-
weanling rats. Developmental Psychobiology, 20, 131–145.
Stehouwer, D. J., & Campbell, B. A. (1978). Habituation of the
forelimb-withdrawal response in neonatal rats. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4,
Stern, J. M. (1997). Offspring-induced nurturance: Animal–
human parallels. Developmental Psychobiology, 31, 19–37.
Suchecki, D., Rosenfeld, P., & Levine, S. (1993). Maternal
regulation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis in the
infant rat: The roles of feeding and stroking. Brain Research.
Developmental Brain Research, 75, 185–192.
Sullivan, R. M., & Hall, W. G. (1988). Reinforcers in infancy:
Classical conditioning using stroking or intra-oral infusions
of milk as UCS. Developmental Psychobiology, 21, 215–
Sullivan, R. M., Hofer, M. A., & Brake, S. C. (1986). Olfactory-
guided orientation in neonatal rats is enhanced by a
conditioned change in behavioral state. Developmental
Psychobiology, 19, 615–623.
Sullivan, R. M., & Holman, P. J. (2010). Transitions in sensitive
period attachment learning in infancy: The role of cortico-
sterone. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 835–
Sullivan, R. M., Landers, M., Yeaman, B., & Wilson, D. A.
(2000). Good memories of bad events in infancy. Nature,
Sullivan, R. M., Stackenwalt, G., Nasr, F., Lemon, C., &
Wilson, D. A. (2000). Association of an odor with activation
of olfactory bulb noradrenergic beta-receptors or locus
coeruleus stimulation is sufficient to produce learned
approach responses to that odor in neonatal rats. Behavioral
Neuroscience, 114, 957–962.
Sullivan, R. M., & Wilson, D. A. (1993). Role of the amygdala
complex in early olfactory associative learning. Behavioral
Neuroscience, 107, 254–263.
Sullivan, R. M., & Wilson, D. A. (2003). Molecular biology of
early olfactory memory. Learning and Memory, 10, 1–4.
Sullivan, R. M., Wilson, D. A., Lemon, C., & Gerhardt, G. A.
(1994). Bilateral 6-OHDA lesions of the locus coeruleus
impair associative olfactory learning in newborn rats. Brain
Research, 643, 306–309.
Sullivan, R. M., Zyzak, D. R., Skierkowski, P., & Wilson, D. A.
(1992). The role of olfactory bulb norepinephrine in early
olfactory learning. Brain Research. Developmental Brain
Research, 70, 279–282.
Swiergiel, A. H., Takahashi, L. K., & Kalin, N. H. (1993).
Attenuation of stress-induced behavior by antagonism of
Developmental PsychobiologyAttachment, Stress, and Learning
corticotropin-releasing factor receptors in the central amyg-
dala in the rat. Brain Research, 623, 229–234.
Takahashi, L. K. (1994). Organizing action of corticosterone on
the development of behavioral inhibition in the preweanling
rat. Brain Research. Developmental Brain Research, 81,
Teicher, M. H., Andersen, S. L., Polcari, A., Anderson, C. M.,
Navalta, C. P., & Kim, D. M. (2003). The neurobiological
consequences of early stress and childhood maltreatment.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 27, 33–44.
Thompson, J. V., Sullivan, R. M., & Wilson, D. A. (2008).
Developmental emergence of fear learning corresponds with
changes in amygdala synaptic plasticity. Brain Research,
Thorsteinsson, E., & James, J. (1999). A meta-analysis of the
effects of experimental manipulations of social support
during laboratory stress. Psychology Health, 14, 869–886.
Upton, K. J., & Sullivan, R. M. (2010). Defining age limits of
the sensitive period for attachment learning in rat pups.
Developmental Psychobiology, 52, 453–464.
Van Oers, H. J., De Kloet, E. R., Whelan, T., & Levine, S.
(1998). Maternal deprivation effect on the infant’s neural
stress markers is reversed by tactile stimulation and feeding
but not by suppressing corticosterone. Journal of Neuro-
science, 18, 10171–10179.
Walker, C. D., Scribner, K. A., Cascio, C. S., & Dallman, M. F.
(1991). The pituitary-adrenocortical system of neonatal rats
is responsive to stress throughout development in a time-
dependent and stressor-specific fashion. Endocrinology, 128,
Widmaier, E. P. (1990). Glucose homeostasis and hypothala-
mic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis during development in rats.
The American Journal of Physiology, 259, E601–E613.
Wiedenmayer, C. P., & Barr, G. A. (2001). Developmental
changes in c-fos expression to an age-specific social
stressor in infant rats. Behavioural Brain Research, 126,
Wiedenmayer, C. P., Magarinos, A. M., McEwen, B. S., & Barr,
G. A. (2003). Mother lowers glucocorticoid levels of
preweaning rats after acute threat. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 1008, 304–307.
Wiedenmayer, C. P., Magarinos, A. M., McEwen, B. S., & Barr,
G. A. (2005). Age-specific threats induce CRF expression in
the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus and hippo-
campus of young rats. Hormones and Behavior, 47, 139–
Wilson, D. A., Sullivan, R. M., & Leon, M. (1987). Single-unit
analysis of postnatal olfactory learning: Modified olfactory
bulb output response patterns to learned attractive odors.
Journal of Neuroscience, 7, 3154–3162.
Yuan, Q., Harley, C. W., Darby-King, A., Neve, R. L., &
McLean, J. H. (2003). Early odor preference learning in the
rat: Bidirectional effects of cAMP response element-binding
protein (CREB) and mutant CREB support a causal role for
phosphorylated CREB. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 4760–
Moriceau, Roth, and Sullivan