1. Andreia Cruz, Mirjam Heinemans, Cristina Márquez, Marta A. Moita
Freezing Displayed by Others Is a Learned Cue of Danger Resulting from Co- experiencing Own Freezing and Shock 
Andreia Cruz, Mirjam Heinemans, Cristina Márquez, Marta A. Moita 
Current Biology 
DOI: /j.cub
Copyright © Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1 Stress Alone Does Not Drive Observational Freezing
(A) Behavioral paradigm used to study observational freezing.
(B) Proportion of time spent freezing over time, by pairs during the social interaction. Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. Left: pairs of animals with observers that received SS are shown (n = 10). On the right pairs of animals with observers that experienced FS are shown (n = 12). Mean ± SEM.
(C) Freezing values per pair, during social interaction, normalized by the freezing of the demonstrator. Line denotes median values.
See also Figure S1.
Current Biology DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2 Manipulation of the Schedule of Shock Delivery to Observers
(A) On the left is behavioral protocol for the manipulation of experience with shock. On the right are details about the experience of each group of observers are shown.
(B) Proportion of time spent freezing over time, by pairs during the social interaction. Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. The left graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that received IS (n = 15). The center graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that experienced DS (n = 15). The right graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that experienced SS (n = 11). Mean ± SEM.
(C) Freezing values per pair, during social interaction, normalized by the freezing of the demonstrator. Line denotes median values.
(D) Proportion of time spent freezing over time, by pairs of demonstrators and observers that experienced DS, during the social interaction. Observers were split into freezers (left, n = 8) and non-freezers (right, n = 7) by the median of the normalized freezing per pair. Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. Mean ± SEM.
See also Figure S2.
Current Biology DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3 Manipulation of the Experience of Freezing
(A) Schematic of the behavioral protocol for the manipulation of experience with freezing.
(B) Proportion of time spent freezing over time, by pairs of demonstrators and observers during the social interaction. Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. The left graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that received SS (n = 11). The center graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that experienced freezing triggered by looming stimuli (n = 14). The right graph corresponds to pairs of animals with observers that experienced freezing in response to 2MT exposure (n = 9). Mean ± SEM.
(C) Freezing values per pair, during social interaction, normalized by the freezing of the demonstrator. Line denotes median values.
See also Figure S3.
Current Biology DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © Terms and Conditions

5. Figure 4
Direct Association between Freezing and Shock Leads to Observational Freezing
(A) Schematic of the behavioral protocol using optogenetic stimulation to drive freezing.
(B) Baseline split of observers that received stimulation + shock (w/ freezing). The left graph shows proportion of time spent freezing by pairs of animals with observers that froze during baseline (n = 4) and center graph is for pairs of animals with observers that did not freeze during baseline (n = 5). Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. Mean ± SEM. On the right are freezing values per pair, during social interaction, normalized by the freezing of the demonstrators are shown. Line denotes median values.
(C) Same as (B) for pairs with observers that received stimulation + shock (w/o freezing) separated by pairs of animals with observers that froze during baseline (n = 5) and pairs of animals with observers that did not freeze during baseline (n = 7).
(D) Proportion of time spent freezing over time, by pairs of animals with observers that experienced stimulation (w/ freezing) in absence of shock (n = 7). Shaded area corresponds to time after tone presentation. Mean ± SEM.
(E) Freezing values per pair, during social interaction, normalized by the freezing of the demonstrator. Line denotes median values.
(F) Time spent freezing in the context where animals received optogenetic stimulation, 24 h after social interaction, as a measure of threat learning.
See also Figure S4.
Current Biology DOI: ( /j.cub )
Copyright © Terms and Conditions