ライフサイエンスコーパス: monogamous

1 rmined that the mating system is effectively monogamous.

2 YZ, XXZ, and XY models, the system is always monogamous.

3 verall, whereas the other relationships were monogamous.

4 e methods are hampered by the immigration of monogamous, already-mated females.

5 Both monogamous and non-monogamous species exist within Eulem

6 e genus, and (2) examine differences between monogamous and non-monogamous species in regions part of

7 ural transcriptomes of reproductive males in monogamous and nonmonogamous species pairs of Peromyscus

8 ibution of V1aR dramatically differs between monogamous and nonmonogamous species.

9 gs from two species of vole, one of which is monogamous and pair bonds whereas the other species is p

10 s, including inbred and outbred populations, monogamous and polygamous mating patterns, as well as sy

11 to drive bi-directional transitions between monogamous and polygynous social mating systems.

12 vioral studies of various species, including monogamous and promiscuous voles.

13 on of progestin receptors (PR) in a socially monogamous and spontaneously parental male rodent has ne

14 in socioreproductive behaviors in a socially monogamous and spontaneously paternal male rodent.

15 In the current study, two monogamous and two nonmonogamous vole species were compa

16 Prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) are monogamous and, like humans, are biparental.

17 l advantages of idiosyncratic mate choice in monogamous animal species.

18 One of the most important decisions in a monogamous animal's life is the choice of a partner (par

19 allenge are essential to survival for bonded monogamous animals and may depend on behavioral compatib

20 h the usual effects of cuckoldry in socially monogamous animals.

21 ssin immunoreactivity were as evident in the monogamous as in the nonmonogamous species.

22 wbirds and smaller for the monochromatic and monogamous bay-winged and screaming cowbirds, suggesting

23 ave been implicated previously in regulating monogamous behaviors, suggesting that the lack of variat

24 ble univalent binding and (2) a tendency for monogamous binding of both MoAb Fab to two Fab epitopes

25 e amount of extra-pair paternity in socially monogamous bird species varies from 0% to 76% extra-pair

26 y increases with male-biased ASR in socially monogamous birds, suggesting that male coercion and/or f

27 In socially monogamous birds, there have been repeated rapid reducti

28 hether OXT contributes to the maintenance of monogamous bonds after they have been formed is unclear.

29 d dispersal in mammals may be more likely on monogamous branches of the phylogeny, and that females m

30 cial nature of bumble bees and their largely monogamous breeding system, which renders their effectiv

31 uctive success across 11 cohorts of socially monogamous but genetically polygynandrous song sparrows

32 ipartite states, we find that GHZ states are monogamous, but surprisingly so are W states.

33 In free-living monogamous California mice (Peromyscus californicus), ma

34 ception; the probability of remaining in the monogamous class was 0.51 between visits 1 and 2.

35 Meerkats are socially monogamous cooperative breeders where a single dominant

36 We enrolled monogamous couples in a longitudinal study between 2005

37 174 monogamous couples, in which one partner was HIV-1 posit

38 SW) and frequently occurs in both members of monogamous couples.

39 followed 1484 immunocompetent, heterosexual, monogamous couples: one with clinically symptomatic geni

40 ch partner were concordant in 55 (95%) of 58 monogamous couples; BV was present in both partners in 1

41 ohorts of two long-lived species of socially monogamous Darwin's finch species, Geospiza fortis and G

42 Results showed that lineages from monogamous evolutionary backgrounds, with limited opport

43 rate of growth was slower in polygynous than monogamous families.

44 rrhoeae from an infected male and two of his monogamous female sex partners.

45 al sets of Drosophila pseudoobscura females: monogamous females allowed to copulate one time (MOC); m

46 females allowed to copulate one time (MOC); monogamous females held with a male over her entire life

47 Of 31 couples monogamous for >3 months, rep-PCR fingerprints were iden

48 Over 90% of the couples were monogamous for the year prior to entry into the study; <

49 29 monogamous heterosexual couples having unprotected sex;

50 le risk information for counseling long-term monogamous heterosexual couples in which one partner has

51 to estimate the risk for HCV infection among monogamous heterosexual couples.

52 In seroprevalence studies in monogamous, heterosexual partners of HCV-infected, HIV-n

53 We retrospectively identified 235 monogamous, HIV-discordant couples in a Ugandan populati

54 way, OXT may help to promote fidelity within monogamous human relationships.

55 ments between this promiscuous lineage and a monogamous laboratory lineage revealed male-specific eff

56 onding between mates in species that display monogamous life strategies.

57 ociation with client fish and an exclusively monogamous life-style.

58 ine males inherit higher MUP expression than monogamous-line males through transgenerational inherita

59 In socially monogamous male prairie voles, AVP acts centrally via va

60 pair-bonding or drug experience in socially monogamous male prairie voles.

61 Monogamous males and females show this pattern of femini

62 ie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) are socially monogamous, males vary in both sexual and spatial fideli

63 ces in parental care between promiscuous and monogamous mammal species?

64 may disperse farther than males in socially monogamous mammalian species.

65 cularly important role in social behavior in monogamous mammals, such as prairie voles (Microtus ochr

66 Our analyses indicate that monogamous marriage is not consistently associated with

67 he regulation of pair bond formation between monogamous mates and suggest potential brain regions inv

68 plex songs and larger repertoires; thus, non-monogamous mating behaviors are predicted to accelerate

69 Non-monogamous mating behaviors including polygyny or extra-

70 Monogamous mating constrains the reproductive success of

71 ttention to the role of sexual conflict in a monogamous mating context.

72 It is widely believed that monogamous mating is a precondition for the evolution of

73 By enforcing a monogamous mating system in populations of Drosophila me

74 pite the independent evolutionary origins of monogamous mating systems, several homologous brain regi

75 exual selection was removed through enforced monogamous mating with random mate assignment or retaine

76 tion in the prairie vole, but not in the non-monogamous meadow vole.

77 e attributed to OXT altering the attitude of monogamous men toward attractive women or their judgment

78 ve effects of condom use were observed among monogamous men.

79 ublished in eLife shows that pair bonding in monogamous mice is protective against tumor growth, like

80 monkeys (Plecturocebus cupreus) are socially monogamous monkeys that display strong pair bonds simila

81 fference in senescence within populations of monogamous, monomorphic species where the sexes share br

82 Monogamous MSM were one exception; the probability of re

83 ensive aggression of wild caught territorial monogamous multiband butterflyfish, Chaetodon multicinct

84 ct classes of sexual risk, which we labeled "monogamous" (n = 1,224), "risk minimizer" (n = 1,443), "

85 s aged 18-45 years who were sexually active, monogamous, not pregnant, and not sex workers, were elig

86 Here we show that the monogamous oldfield mouse (Peromyscus polionotus) has re

87 monkeys, as it does in more egalitarian and monogamous ones, like prairie voles and humans, when the

88 ual selection, as measured by mating system (monogamous or polygynous) and by the degree of SSD.

89 hominins had mating systems with pair-bonds (monogamous or polygynous), then food sharing by adult fe

90 We outline the cognitive building blocks of monogamous pair bonding in prairie voles (Microtus ochro

91 em is responsible for the enduring nature of monogamous pair bonding.

92 cial bonding in general and the stability of monogamous pair bonds and offspring care in particular.

93 The formation of monogamous pair bonds, by prairie voles, is facilitated

94 Prairie vole breeder pairs form monogamous pair bonds, which are maintained through the

95 he formation, expression, and maintenance of monogamous pair bonds.

96 r long-lived birds with multi-year, socially monogamous pair bonds.

97 attraction and the subsequent development of monogamous pair-bonds is substantially predicted by infl

98 ves when local mating groups are small (e.g. monogamous pairs) and when different resources are homog

99 example, seeds, eggs or young from a pair of monogamous parents) and their father, mother or both are

100 Persons in long-term monogamous partnerships are at lower risk of HCV acquisi

101 with chronic HCV infection who are in steady monogamous partnerships versus those with multiple partn

102 ugh half of the gaps were positive (serially monogamous partnerships), many were of short duration; t

103 shows how heavy rainfall may affect socially monogamous partnerships, more data are required to estim

104 nditions influence the stability of socially monogamous partnerships, we provide novel insights that

105 possible underlying mechanisms in a socially monogamous passerine.

106 ric recombinases, to identify the unique and monogamous patterns of Int bridges for integrative and e

107 and bond-disrupted deer mice showed that in monogamous Peromyscus polionotus and Peromyscus californ

108 and meadow (M. pennsylvanicus) voles and the monogamous pine vole (M. pinetorum), and two species of

109 We model a territorial, monogamous population inhabiting a completely homogeneou

110 e at first intercourse in this predominantly monogamous population, which may be explained by more vi

111 The monogamous populations also evolved a greater net reprod

112 Males from monogamous populations also exhibited lower expression o

113 IV status awareness reduces HIV incidence in monogamous populations by 0.27 percent for women and 0.6

114 Males from monogamous populations did not differ from males from po

115 er >150 generations of evolution, males from monogamous populations elicited a weaker postmating stim

116 In the monogamous populations, males evolved to be less harmful

117 dampened response to mating with males from monogamous populations.

118 We have recently established the socially monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) as an ani

119 that a rodent species, the highly social and monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), greatly

120 In the socially monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), mating i

121 y conserved mammalian CpGs, for the socially monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster).

122 behavior, including differences between the monogamous prairie vole and its promiscuous congeners.

123 We utilized pair bonding in the socially monogamous prairie vole as an example of socio-sexual ex

124 erstand potential underlying mechanisms, the monogamous prairie vole can provide important insights.

125 y to form long-term pair-bonds, the socially monogamous prairie vole has emerged as an excellent mode

126 used the social defeat model in the socially monogamous prairie vole to investigate the impact of thi

127 affiliative behaviour in the highly social, monogamous prairie vole, but not in the relatively asoci

128 m the male segment of a 25-year study of the monogamous prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster, in Illino

129 l CRF receptors modulate pair bonding in the monogamous prairie vole.

130 ssessed in a series of experiments using the monogamous prairie vole.

131 roles in the formation of pair bonds in the monogamous prairie vole.

132 vior and pair bond formation in the socially monogamous prairie vole.

133 Monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) and prom

134 in nucleus accumbens (NAc) expression across monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) and prom

135 Like humans, socially monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) form opp

136 Monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) show mat

137 In socially monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster), parenta

138 ects of prenatal VPA exposure in the social, monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster).

139 boratory proxy for pair bonding) in socially monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster).

140 of CB1 within the brains of closely related monogamous prairie voles and promiscuous meadow voles, a

141 ain distribution of CART mRNA and peptide in monogamous prairie voles compared to congener promiscuou

142 lives of many species, including humans, and monogamous prairie voles have become the predominant mod

143 elective relationships with mates and peers (monogamous prairie voles) or peers (group-living meadow

144 Among monogamous prairie voles, levels of vasopressin receptor

145 In monogamous prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster, males ar

146 In monogamous prairie voles, OT and dopamine interact to pr

147 Using monogamous prairie voles, we first employed receptor pha

148 Using 1-photon in vivo Ca(2+) imaging in monogamous prairie voles, we found that pair bonding doe

149 We investigated Oxtr expression in monogamous prairie voles, which have a well-characterize

150 nisms are involved in pair bond formation in monogamous prairie voles.

151 ment of NAcc DA in social attachment of the "monogamous" prairie vole (Microtus orchrogaster).

152 gate central glucose uptake in 17 males of a monogamous primate species, the titi monkey (Callicebus

153 can evolve even if mothers are not strictly monogamous, provided that they can constrain their offsp

154 he Eurasian sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus), a monogamous raptor with reversed sexual size dimorphism.

155 observed in mice lacking SDF-1, suggesting a monogamous relationship between CXCR4 and SDF-1.

156 The apparent monogamous relationship between I-309 and CCR8 is unusua

157 9 years), and 75% reported being in the same monogamous relationship for the past 6 months.

158 owed again that OXT only stimulated men in a monogamous relationship to approach pictures of attracti

159 a woman had bacterial vaginosis and was in a monogamous relationship with a male partner.

160 al administration of OXT stimulates men in a monogamous relationship, but not single ones, to keep a

161 hat where OXT release is stimulated during a monogamous relationship, it may additionally promote its

162 Eight of the nine patients were in monogamous relationships.

163 Crosses between the monogamous rodent species Peromyscus polionotus and the

164 ie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) is a socially monogamous rodent species that forms pair bonds after ma

165 airie vole (Microtus ochrogaster)-a socially monogamous rodent that forms enduring pair bonds between

166 The prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), a monogamous rodent that forms long-lasting pair bonds, ha

167 irie vole (Microtus ochrogaster)--a socially monogamous rodent that forms long-term pair bonds after

168 The prairie vole is a socially monogamous rodent that is an excellent animal model for

169 irie vole (Microtus ochrogaster), a socially monogamous rodent, often used as an animal model to scre

170 Research on a monogamous rodent, the prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaste

171 is associated with the bonding experience in monogamous rodents at which disruption of pair bonds is

172 Studies in monogamous rodents have begun to elucidate the neural ci

173 Prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) are monogamous rodents that display high levels of affiliati

174 Prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) are monogamous rodents that form pair bonds characterized by

175 r-bond formation has emerged from studies in monogamous rodents.

176 reference formation and paternal behavior in monogamous rodents.

177 sex was associated with white race and a non-monogamous sex partner in men and women.

178 ng oral sex was associated with having a non-monogamous sex partner in men.

179 ce, age of 20-44 years, and having had a non-monogamous sex partner.

180 have substantial reproductive control, as in monogamous, sexually monomorphic, and arboreal species.

181 t hold universally and that in fact the only monogamous situation exists for only three observers.

182 airie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) exhibit a monogamous social structure in nature, whereas closely r

183 o be associated with a monogamous versus non-monogamous social structure.

184 s (r = -0.08), and with wife quality only in monogamous societies (r = 0.15).

185 e (Microtus ochrogaster) is a highly social, monogamous species and displays pair bonding that can be

186 Climate change can influence populations of monogamous species by affecting pair-bond dynamics.

187 ventral pallidal region of several unrelated monogamous species compared with nonmonogamous species.

188 Both monogamous and non-monogamous species exist within Eulemur, a genus of stre

189 amine differences between monogamous and non-monogamous species in regions part of putative "pair-bon

190 The prairie vole is a socially monogamous species in which breeder pairs typically show

191 In a monogamous species lacking sperm competition, Peromyscus

192 a mating strategy observed in many socially monogamous species often linked to poor reproductive suc

193 x-biased gene expression in P. polionotus, a monogamous species that also exhibits reduced sexual dim

194 produces sperm with longer midpiece than the monogamous species, and midpiece size correlates positiv

195 In monogamous species, pair bonding leads to striking chang

196 In monogamous species, prosocial behaviors directed toward

197 In socially monogamous species, sexual selection not only depends on

198 vior and physiology are typically reduced in monogamous species, we initially predicted that male and

199 inked to the neurobiology of pair bonding in monogamous species.

200 as enhanced male social affiliation in a non-monogamous species.

201 regions mediate pair bond formation in this monogamous species.

202 e should be no selection for imprinting in a monogamous species.

203 be explained if imprinting was absent in the monogamous species.

204 pressin influence pair-bond formation in the monogamous species.

205 a key component of male fitness in socially monogamous systems and could cause selection on female e

206 irs of oncogenic HPV, and cervical cancer in monogamous Thai women develops in part as a result of tr

207 at higher levels in the ventral forebrain of monogamous than in promiscuous vole species, whereas dop

208 f these methods assume either both sexes are monogamous to infer full sibships only or only one sex i

209 abundant in oldfield mice, where it induces monogamous-typical parental behaviours, than in the clos

210 he brain that appear to be associated with a monogamous versus non-monogamous social structure.

211 ver 10 years of experimental evolution under monogamous versus polyandrous mating patterns.

212 ction, we compared fitness and extinction of monogamous versus polyandrous populations through an exp

213 We see no such pattern in other monogamous vertebrates; the prevalence of monogamy in bi

214 ped CRFR(1) and CRFR(2) in the brains of two monogamous vole species, the prairie vole and pine vole,

215 and paternal care, found selectively in the monogamous vole.

216 In earlier studies, monogamous voles have been reported to differ from close

217 Social, monogamous voles have more OT receptors in the extended

218 Parrotlets are monogamous with long-term pair bonds, exhibit a strongly

219 he state is initially polygamous and becomes monogamous with temperature and coupling.

220 The risks of cervical carcinoma in monogamous women and of oncogenic HPV in their husbands

221 visual acuity than that of the pair-bonding, monogamous X. flavipinnis.