Just to let you know, Kevin, Panksepp's presentation is not the entire video. It is two presentations. The second is from Dr. Solms, as they are both recipients of honorary membership to a professional society for neuroscience and it's meaning in cognition and, most especially in these presentations, communication. So, if necessary, to reply to the topic of Panskepp's work, you need not watch the entire video, just the first 55 minutes, and you can even fast forward through the first 5 minutes as they are introductions by the host.
What Burl so aptly pointed out about my model of singing is that, music or singing is the root of language. We as a creature, sang before we could construct a symbolic language. And so it is, right in front of your nose. A baby is not born knowing how to speak English, German, or Swahili. They learn that. But every single one of them can hit a soprano C, effortlessly, and, as it perceptionally seems, forever. It is later, in learning language and the speech patterns of our culture that we learn to subdue or eradicate our ability to sing. It is my contention that learning to sing is actually a case of recovering our lost ability. In fact, one of the "tricks" to accessing higher range is called the "crying" timbre, I kid you not.
Anyway, other creatures share this sound effect. Dogs howl, cats caterwaul. Cows go moo. I took some guff from my vocalist peers when I suggested that a dog is a perfect model of how to sing, starting with breath support. Until they realized I was right. Watch a dog bark. It involves his entire body. The legs assume a stance, the ribs compress, and the dog issues forth with, believe it or not, a relaxed throat but proper compression of tissues similar to folds in humans. It is endemic to the nature of most mammals to do this. What's also important to note is that similar sounds are trans-species. A cry is a cry, whether human or canine. A growl is a growl. A soothing tone, likewise. If you growl and bark at a dog, he will likely do the same back at you. If you speak in low relaxed tones of quiet volume, he will be calm, because that is how momma spoke, too. You think I am wrong, maybe? I absolutely dare you to try it on your dog. Even better, a dog that does not know you. I guarantee that if you come with aggressive tones and signals, you will get bit.
Why does Shadow sing? He most especially sings on the commercials for Yellow Tail wine, specifically, the one on the roof where the actors are singing opera. He doesn't sing with me but then, the closest I have been singing opera is Ronnie James Dio with "Rainbow in the Dark" and "Holy Diver." Although I did do a version of "Gethsemane" from the rock "opera", "Jesus Christ, Superstar." However, he will also sing with the Overstock dot com ads where they are singing their version of "Jingle Bells." But mostly, he likes traditional style arias.
What purpose does his singing (it's not just a howl, he varies in pitch, which also creates a variation in timbre) accomplish toward accessing resources? Is he, in fact, appreciating the finer things in life? Or is it a connection to something musical in a number of creatures? And, if so, how can it be denied that he has the ability to reason or have similar emotions simply because he did not form the lyric "Time to say goodbye" as song by Sarah Brightman (my favorite voice of all time)?
Both speakers quote Freud. The communication ability of animals is one of level, not kind. Dogs can reason, think, emote just like humans can, but not always in the same way or at least, in the same vocal language. I have often said, as is described by those way more qualified than I am, such as Spiritdogs, that dogs can generalize, just not in the ways we always expect or in the degree that we expect, depending on the situation. For example, I didn't expect the "off" command (meaning "to disengage";) to become generalized in my dog, but it did. Perhaps because I trained in more than one circumstance. But in other circumstances, the behavior may not be generalized. One can command a dog to drop a toy or item and get obedience. And that's out the window if a raw meaty bone is involved. Unless you have trained in that circumstance, as well. Dogs do not, as we yet know, have language that involves time. So, while you can tell a misbehaving kid to wait until Daddy gets home, it means nothing to a dog. If you punish a dog later than a second after the behavior, it is lost, for the dog has moved on in his mind. And you can't say "Remember two days ago when you humped the visitor? Well, don't do that." The dog will just look at you like you are speaking Greek.
But just because the dog lacked the conceptual framework to connect today's correction with yesterday's transgression doesn't mean the dog lacks reasoning ability. By the way, withholding correction from a child doesn't work well, either. You have to correct or deal with the behavior right then, such as immediate removal of privileges, no dessert, whatever. So, even the notion that we can connect a punishment through the time conjugations of our language doesn't mean that works and certainly doesn't mean we are superior beings in our ability to reason. Of course, that all goes out the window when dealing with a wife. Like Jeff Foxworthy intimates, a wife can remember something from a year ago and you are still paying for it. 
Maybe a little more germaine is that while the current understanding and thinking from scientists who are actually undertaking the work, not just waiting for some indoctrinated undergrad to prove them right, is that there are commonalities in the communication urge trans-species, it is by no means a support of "energy" theories, or quantum consciousness. It is, to an extent, quite the extension of behaviorism. Simply observing what is and noting that, with the exception that they are including the notion of emotions, which appear to have a biological or neurological analog or cause or chemical cue. That is, they are not dismissing what we call emotion but are, in fact, saying, "well, what the heck is it? And where is it happening? What are the cellular or neuronal signs?"