Skip to main content

Post 1: Rodent Models of Neurogenesis and Antidepressants

By

Santarelli et al. (2003) and Bessa et al. (2009) both investigate the theory that antidepressants increase neurogenesis and/or neural plasticity in the hippocampus of depressed patients. While both articles support the role of stress in inducing depression, that depression may decrease neural plasticity, and that antidepressants promote neural plasticity, they disagree on whether increased neurogenesis is required for the behavioral and molecular benefits of antidepressants.

Both Santarelli and Bessa use rodents as models to analyze the link between neurogenesis and the behavioral and molecular effects of antidepressants, but Bessa’s article demonstrates clearer, more advanced methods and analysis, reflective of its later publication. For one, Santarelli primarily uses novelty-suppressed feeding (NSF) as a behavioral assay for depression, while Bessa uses a sucrose preference test and forced swimming test for depression, as well as an NSF test for anxiety. The use of NSF alone is insufficient as a behavioral measure of depression as it is representative of anxiety; while anxiety and depression and highly co-morbid, they are not mutually exclusive, and it is thus flawed to make conclusions about depressive behaviors using NSF alone. Additionally, Santarelli’s use of X-irradiation as a way to prevent neurogenesis in the hippocampus may produce confounding factors due to its ability to induce unpredictable mutations and inflammation. Bessa specifically points out the possible problems with X-rays and elects instead to use methylazoxymethanol (MAM) to block neurogenesis.

The articles’ understanding and application of neural plasticity also may contribute to their opposing conclusions: Santarelli’s paper suggests that only neurogenesis—the creation of new neurons in hippocampal regions—is under consideration for the effects of antidepressants whereas Bessa takes on a broader definition of neural plasticity that includes many changes in neuronal morphology in both the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Santarelli’s measurement of neurogenesis in terms of amounts of new cells (i.e. “doubling of BrdU-labeled cells in WT mice”) is also vague and creates some ambiguity. The more precise measurements of neural volume, dendritic length, number of dendrites, dendritic branching, spine type ratio, and neuron number in specific brain regions and neuron types by Bessa lead to a much clearer representation of the structural changes that accompany depression, neural plasticity, and antidepressant use.

Through these differential methods and analyses, Santarelli and Bessa come to alternative conclusions, with Bessa coming to the more prudent conclusion that adult neurogenesis is not necessary for antidepressants to elicit its behavioral effects. Today, over 10 years after the publication of Bessa’s paper, the cause of depression, actions of antidepressants, and extent of adult neurogenesis in humans is still under dispute. While these experiments could not solve these mysteries, they succeeded in supporting previous discoveries and contributing to research on one of the most common psychological disorders of modern times.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gut-Brain Interactions: Buffington et al, Reber et al 2016

By
April 13 Papers (Buffington et. al, Reber et. al) I found this week’s papers to be quite novel in that they both proposed potential treatments for neurodevelopmental or psychiatric disorders that target bacterial or microbial abnormalities and how these give rise to certain behavioral and physical symptoms associated with the disorders. I thought this was a very unusual yet interesting approach, and as I have not previously studied the gut-brain axis, these papers offered me a fresh perspective on researching psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. They were also unconventional in their focus of the physical symptoms that often accompany mental disorders, as this is not something that I have seen many other papers touch upon very much. Particularly, I was surprised by the Reber et al paper’s focus on the link between psychiatric disorders and inflammation in organs other than the brain, such as the colon, and the Buffington et al paper’s description of a relationship between ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al. and Reber et al.: Gut-Brain Interactions

By
While I have not encountered a lot of gut-brain interaction literature yet. I found each paper unique and fascinating. Reber et al felt inaccessible for me. I felt like I didn’t understand what the goal of the paper really was and why they did the tests that they did. It seems like most of their relevant information got shoved into numerous supplementary figures and their behavior was quite difficult to follow. Multiple sections of their paper were supported with data found entirely in supplementary figures, which makes it difficult to follow the same conclusions. I have a few issues with the behavior they chose and because of this, I struggle to find driving conclusions from their work. I don’t understand why the CSC was not only the prior stressor but was also the acute stress condition both groups faced. To me, I feel like it would have made more sense to have the CSC be the prior stressor and then judge the effect on social behavior with maybe a three choice chamber test or te...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al (2016) and Reber et al. (2016)

By
This week's articles were about the role of the gut-brain axis in neurodevelopment and stress. Reber and colleagues used a heat-killed version of the bacteria, M. vaccae, as a type of vaccine and found that administration to mouse models resulted in decreased response to chronic stress, prevented colitis related to stress, and reduced measures of anxiety. Reber et al. also used the inactivated M. vaccae in a mouse model of IBD and found that the bacteria prevented stress-induce flare-ups of colitis, but that this could be reversed by removing T cells. Buffington and colleagues instead examined the role of gut microbiota in maternal high-fat diets (MHFD) in the neurodevelopment and social behaviors of their offspring. Buffington et al. found that housing MHFD rats with the offspring of regular diet (MRD) rats prevented social deficits in their offspring. They also found that this co-housing arrangement prevented an imbalance in the gut bacteria Reber and colleagues' findings w...
Post a Comment
Read more