Skip to main content

Post 1- Neurogenesis & Anti-depressant Actions

By

The two papers by Santarelli et al and Bessa et al aim to investigate the impact that antidepressants have on behavioural effects towards depressive disorders in relation to neurogenesis and neuronal plasticity. The treatment of antidepressants (ADs) discussed include fluoxetine, imipramine, desipramine, halodperidol, vehicle, and two putative antidepressants. Although the findings of the two appear concise, Santarelli et al do not present methodology in a similar coherent manner as Bessa et al, which may reduce its comprehensiveness somewhat. In contrast, Bessa et al present an extensive section indicating the materials and methodology used (such as the subjects, conditions and measurement technologies/tests).
 In the research conducted by Santarelli et al, emphasis is placed on the neurotransmitters serotonin (5HT) and noradrenaline (NA), claimed to increase in levels as a response to antidepressants. This may indicate enhancement in brain mobilization but also an improvement in appetite, as these are the predominant roles of the neurotransmitters. Bessa et al do not discuss these neurotransmitters as abundant. However, they instead investigated anhedonia each week with use of a sucrose preference test. In depressed subjects, when anhedonia was reduced and treated with antidepressants, which in turn increase serotonin levels (and influences appetite), there was an improvement in the sucrose preference test result. Bessa et al state that chronic mild stress can influence behavioural responses in relation to ADs. They also challenge Santarelli’s belief of neurogenesis being a direct cause to behavioural effects of antidepressants. Their findings instead suggest that even when there is a blockage in neurogenesis (tested with MAM), there is still evidence towards efficiency in alleviating depressive symptoms with ADs. Bessa et al thereby claim that neuronal plasticity, dendritic and spine density is a larger influence to depressive behaviour than neurogenesis.  With more focus on the biochemical imbalances of the neurotransmitters involved in the monoamine hypothesis (serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine), Bessa et al would be adding more up to date findings building upon the previous research by Santarelli et al. 
In summary, reading the two papers created a greater understanding towards how different publications can build on each other over time. These two studies provide more coherent and supportive evidence to a common treatment such as antidepressants used in mice and its potential effect on human patients. Behavior is certainly affected by antidepressant treatment, thus the main contrast between the two findings is their respective causal factors within the brain. 

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