Social Buffering is Dependent on Mutual Experience in Adolescent Male Mice Exposed to Social Defeat Stress

Individuals who experience emotional, physical, or sexual abuse as children suffer from higher rates of major depressive disorder, drug abuse, and suicide. Early life interventions such as peer support groups can be beneficial to adolescents who experience trauma, suggesting that social support is important in facilitating rehabilitation and promoting resiliency to stress. Although there are some animal paradigms that can model how peer-peer interactions influence stress-reactivity, less is known about how individual stress experiences influence the effectiveness of social buffering.

These data suggest that the efficacy of social buffering can be mediated by individual stress experience.

The vicarious social defeat stress (VSDS) paradigm allows for the assessment of two different stress modalities, physical (PS) and emotional (ES) stress, which confer different levels of stress with similar biological and behavioral outcomes. Using a modified VSDS paradigm in which pairs of mice experience ES and PS together we can begin to evaluate how stress exposure influences the buffering efficacy of social relationships. Adolescent mice (postnatal day 35) were randomly combined into dyads and were allocated into either mutual experience or cohabitation pairs. Within each dyad, one mouse was assigned to the physically stressed (PS) condition and was repeatedly exposed to an aggressive CD1 mouse while the other mouse was designated as the partner. In the mutual experience dyads the partner mice witnessed the defeat bout (ES) while in the cohabitation dyads the partner was separated from the PS mouse and returned after the 10 min defeat bout was terminated (non-stressed). After 10 days of defeat, mice were tested in the social interaction test (SIT), the elevated plus maze (EPM), and the forced swim test (FST).

PS-exposed mice in the cohabitation dyads, but not those in the mutual experience dyads, showed significantly more avoidance of a novel CD1 aggressor or c57BL/6 mouse, in the SIT. Surprisingly, both partner conditions showed avoidance to a CD1. Interestingly, non-stressed partner mice spent less time in the open arms of the EPM, suggesting increased anxiety; only PS-exposed mice in cohabitation dyads showed more time spent immobile in the FST, indicative of increased learned helplessness. Conclusions: These data suggest that the efficacy of social buffering can be mediated by individual stress experience.