Skip to main content

Week 1: Santarelli and Bessa

By
The articles written by Santarelli and Bessa, both aim to explore the neuro-modulating effects which influence the behavioral changes associated with anti-depressant (AD) medication. In 2003, Santarelli hypothesized that neurogenesis in the hippocampus was the primary mechanism of action of ADs which leads to an improvement in depressive-like behavior in rodents. They confirmed this hypothesis by measuring feeding latency in a novelty-suppressed feeding (NSF) test, often used to assess depression in rodent models. After treatment with several AD medications, and evaluation of behavioral tests, it was concluded that neurogenesis in the hippocampus played a major role in the behavioral modification of depressed rodents by measuring neurogenic factors in the subjects associated with neurogenesis.

The Bessa study was conducted 6 years after the publication of Santarelli's article concluding the effect of neurogenesis on behavioral modifications of ADs. The Bessa paper includes a far more comprehensive array of both behavioral and structural analyses post treatment with ADs. Their study also included the use of a cytostatic agent, methylazoxymethanol (MAM). This drug inhibited neurogenesis and was co-administered with the ADs in the different subgroups of animals. With the inhibition of neurogenesis, it was found that the behavioral modifications of ADs persisted in the chronic mild stress (CMS) animals. Meaning, the reversal of depressive-like behaviors was not dependent on hippocampal neurogenesis. They further explain the causality of the improvements of depressive-like behavior and accredit the improvements to neuronal plastic changes, rather than the birth of new neurons.

When analyzing the differences between the Santarelli and Bessa article, I found it most interesting that Bessa does not refute the finding of Santarelli, but builds off of them. Bessa does not deny the occurrence of neurogenesis as a result of the introduction of ADs, however, they do prove with the use of the cytostatic agent MAM that this is not the primary modulator of the behavioral effects of AD medication. In their discussion they introduce the idea of neurogenesis being important for the reduction of anxiety-like symptoms in rodents. As discussed by Bessa, while neurogenesis is not required for behavioral modification of depression with ADs, it does appear to play a vital role in their anxiolytic effects. This would be an interesting place for further research and development for a new hypothesis of the role of neurogenesis in the behavioral effects of modulating serotonergic pathways.

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