Skip to main content

Blog post 1: Neurogenesis and Antidepressants

By

Both articles by Santarelli et al. (2003) as well as the Bessa et al. (2009) looked at the requirement of neurogenesis in the action of Antidepressant drugs used to treat mood behaviors. The Santarelli et al. (2003) paper supports the hypothesis that antidepressants (fluoxetine, imipramine, desipramine) may be mediated by an increase in neurogenesis in the stress induced hippocampus of mice models. The Bessa et al, (2009) paper, in contrast, rejected this hypothesis and instead suggested that the effects of antidepressant drugs are associated with neuronal remodeling and plasticity. 

Immediately after reading both articles I was more inclined to appreciate the work done by Bessa et al. over Santarelli et al. The Bessa et al. paper is highly structured with a distinct section for an abstract, introduction, methods, results and conclusion. Their sections were highly informative as they defined each important term involved and comprehensively explained the methods and materials involved in their study. This is in stark contrast to the Santarelli, et al. paper which proved to be a dense and confusing read. The Santarelli et al, paper was just a large amalgamation of haphazard introductory context, methods and experimental results all present in a block format that did not allow for an easy flow of reading. 

This disorganization does not stop at structure and seems to continue into their research as well. Focusing specifically on the methods of neurogenesis inhibition used by both articles, they diverge with the Bessa et al. paper utilizing more supported techniques. Santarelli et. al’s main technique of neurogenesis blocking is low-dose x-irradiation of the hippocampus. As seen in Fig. 4a, lead shielding was used to administer the radiation specifically to the area of interest; the SGZ of the hippocampus. They seem to begin with antidepressant administration along with x-ray exposure, as well as the novelty- suppressed feeding test without any time for recovery of the animals. As explained in the Bessa et al. paper, this seems as though it may provide further changes in the brain that interferes with the variable being tested. X-irradiation is associated with inflammation in the brain and subsequently may trigger widespread immune response leading to disruptions and possible confounding factors in their study. If the method of neurogenesis inhibition is questionable, that leads to further questioning of the results obtained. Apoptosis of the SGZ induced by irradiation and attenuation of AD response is interpreted by Santarelli et al. as the need for neurogenesis for AD mechanisms, however their results could also be interpreted as the disruption of AD mechanisms due to lack of neuronal projections at all as x-irradiation is shown to stimulate apoptotic behavior and no analysis of BrDu cells in response to irradiation was done. Bessa et al. on the other hand, used a cytostatic agent used to arrest neurogenesis; MAM or methylazoxymethanol. This method was carried out using subcutaneous injection and therefore did not stimulate immune responses in the brain, but elsewhere in the body of the animal.

 Furthermore, the rats were given an appropriate amount of time to recover and tests for general health were administered prior to any behavioral paradigm or drug administration. To be certain that MAM inhibited neurogenesis, analysis of cells and proteins associated with neurogenesis were taken into account. Immunohistochemistry revealed the decrease in density of BrdU positive cells (staining cells in the synthesis phase of the cell cycle) in the animals with MAM administration (Fig. S1b) and the density of Ki-67-positive cells (nuclear protein expressed in all phases of the cell cycle except rest) was also decreased in animals with MAM (Fig. 1d). Figures 1f,g,h also showed labelled cell growth. This definitively demonstrates the ability of MAM to block neurogenesis. It seems as though Bessa et al. approached their study with more structure and scientifically sound methods overall as compared to Santarelli et al. The actual results of both papers have coinciding and conflicting answers and the hypothesis, although well presented by Bessa et al. could be subjected to more experimentation and debate.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 2- Dopamine Modulation of Depressive-like Behaviors

By
The Chaudhury et al paper explored the neural circuit mechanisms involved in the dopamine modulation of certain symptoms of depression. In this study, the researchers looked at social interaction and sucrose preference as part of their social-defeat paradigm, which has been shown in the past to be indicative of depressive-like behaviors. Although I initially did not completely see the connection between the social-defeat stress model of depression and the tonic vs phasic firing of dopamine neurons, it seemed that susceptibility and resilience to stress played a role in the functional/behavioral effects of dopamine firing. It was interesting to see how chronic mild stress with phasic firing of VTA dopamine neurons converted even resilient mice into susceptible mice.  The Tye et al paper similarly looked at the dopamine modulation of depressive-like behaviors, focusing on motivation with the forced swim tests and open field tests, followed by measurement of anhedonia by quantifyi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sial & Allsop

By
Sial et al. derived a novel approach for studying what they deem vicarious defeat stress (VSDS) as a model for MDD, PTSD, and other mood-related disorders as an alternative to the classical CSDS paradigm. Using adult male mice, they demonstrate that their model induces a robust and measurable social avoidant phenotype as well as other stress and anxiety related behavioral outputs. Their subsequent rescue study with chronic fluoxetine treatment shows reversal of the behavioral phenotypes and emphasizes the predictive validity of the model. Allsop et al. found that BLA-projecting ACC neurons preferentially encode socially derived aversive cue information by encoding the demonstrator’s distress response during observational learning, hence enabling acquisition of negative valence of cue by BLA neurons and behavioral output. In order to test their hypothesis, Allsop et al. used an observational fear conditional paradigm to create association between a conditioned stimulu...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington and Reber

By
Buffington et al. explore a mechanism by which maternal obesity can induce neuronal and subsequent behavioral disorders. Using a model of high-fat diet (MHFD)-induced obesity, the authors showcase the strong connection between the brain and the gut, and its impact on behavior. The findings are provocative; by exposing these offspring to the microbiome of control offspring, there was evidence of a rescued observed behavioral phenotype. Furthermore, a phylogenetic profiling of the gut microbiome revealed a decrease in L. reuteri within MHFD offspring, and introduction of live L. reuteri into the drinking water shows successful rescue of the behavioral issues in the MHFD offspring. L. reuteri-induced expression of oxytocin within the paraventricular nuclei of the hypothalamus provides a potential mechanistic explanation for the behavioral changes. I thought this paper provided robust support for the hypothesized interaction between the gut biome and the developing CNS, with tremendous po...
Post a Comment
Read more