Skip to main content

Post 3: DA circuits and recovery from stress

By
Ramirez’s research group explores the role of the dentate gyrus in both false memory formation and repression of depressive like behaviors in papers published two years apart. These papers complement each other as the second 2015 elaborates and grows from the previous 2013 paper.

Ramirez et al’s 2013 paper explored the effects of stimulating the Dentate Gyrus (DG) to create a false memory. To do this, mice were first exposed to context A. While exploring this novel environment, the neurons activated were located and marked. Then, the mice were fear conditioned with foot shocks in context B while the same neurons that were activated in context A were reactivated. Ultimately, the mice were exposed to context A’ again as well as a control novel context C. The mice then responded with a fear response of freezing in context A, despite never having been fear conditioned within the context, but showed no response in context C. This same response was not seen when the CA1 region of the hippocampal neurons were targeted. These specific neurons also had much more overlap during the two distinct contexts. These results suggest that the fear memory was recreated to be observed in Context A, despite it having occurred in context B. The researchers induced a ‘false memory’ by manipulating specific neurons in the DG. Additionally, a real and fake fear memory can both be induced by fear memory recall as shown through the association of light with the fear response. The researchers then connected the central and basolateral amygdala to the freeze response and false memory network by looking at the cells activated. They observed the same response for the CeA and BLA in the false and true memories. This makes sense as the paper mentioned that it is common for the brain to activate very similarly for a true and false memory.
Ramirez et al continues with the DG and its role in memories and emotional response as they examine the role of happy memories in depressive behaviors. This is interesting because it mirrors their previous research in that it goes the opposite way; they activate the DG to produce happy memories instead of fear conditioned ones. Again, they introduce the mice to a happy memory (hanging out with a female mouse), track which neurons in the DG are activated, then reactive them after inducing stress. The research group explored many avenues as to the effects this would have, evident by the many supplementary figures, but most interestingly they observed a reversal of depressive behaviors as seen in tests like the tail suspension test, sucrose preference test, and novelty suppressed feeding tests. In conjunction with these behavioral paradigms, they were also looking at the molecular effects and observed an increase in neurogenesis, activation of the nucleus accumbens, and activation in the BLA. All of these results pointed to a network connection in positive experiences with the nucleus accumbens, BLA, and DG. Lastly, blocking dopamine blocked the light-inducing effects of the DG, insinuating that dopamine plays a critical role in that happy memory recall and ameliorating depressive symptoms. However, the authors did not focus on this much more.   

Each of these papers highlights the interesting advancements in identifying and utilizing neurons with new technology. Just the sheer ability to visualize specific neurons being activated during a specific context or memory using c-fos or mCherry, then being able to go back and optogenetically stimulate those specific neurons is impressive. They combined measurements of quantifiable activation, specific location, and behavior to support their hypothesis. While there are still areas to explore, such as the nucleus accumbens and BLA interactions with the dentate gyrus, I think this paper utilized fear conditioning and quantifying neuron’s activity well. The mechanism of glutamate and DA is still somewhat unclear, even though the paper touched on the necessity of it to induce the reversal effect of depressive symptoms. In terms of translating this to a human model, researchers, from my knowledge, cannot optogenetically stimulate specific neurons in the brains of humans ethically yet. However, it does illuminate another avenue for potential explorations and treatments in depression.   

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gut-brain axis

By
This weeks papers Reber et al. 2016 and Buffington et al. 2016 present a super interesting look into the gut-brain axis. Regarding both of these papers, it was amazing to see how potent favorable or unfavorable gut microbiome compositions are in affecting neuronal signaling and overall behavior. Reber et al. shows how immunoregulatory immunization with specifically heat killed M.vaccae can serve as a protective factor against chronic subordinate stress induce colotis as well as behavioral symptoms due to chronic stress as such. Interestringly, this paper depleted regulatory T cell activity via the anti CD25 antibody in order to show that the antiinflammatory mechanism induced by m vaccae immunization is depented on the secondary regulatory mechanisms offered by Treg proliferation and signaling. But, when T reg signaling was removed, this did not seem to cause a significant change in behavior . Therefore, this begs the consideration of what othe rmechanisms may be at play in order ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

Gut-Brain Interactions: Buffington et al. (2016) and Reber et al. (2016)

By
Buffington et al. (2016) and Reber et al. (2016) present quite fascinating approaches to studying the interactions or ‘axis’ between the rodent (and human) gut and brain. As the gut is a primary route for bringing things from the environment into our body, these two studies present very clear and convincing evidence for the relevance and translatable validity of their various hypotheses.   One of the most interesting conclusions to me from Buffington et al. was that co-housing three high-fat diet offspring with just one regular-diet offspring was enough to rescue their social behavior deficits and microbiome profiles. This is remarkable, and I would like to hear more about possible mechanisms for this transfer to actually occur. Although the article mentions that mice do eat each other’s feces to transfer microbiota, could there be a certain “threshold” or level of bacteria needed to observe this phenotype switch? That is, how many more high-fat diet mice could have been house...
Post a Comment
Read more