Skip to main content

Week 5

By

            In regards to the first paper, the VSDS seems like a good model for analyzing the effects of emotional stress, but I’m not convinced based on this one paper that it’s a good model for PTSD. I have a difficult time reading about animal models because instinctively, I relate everything back to humans. Not everyone who witnesses something traumatic has PTSD. Also, I wish they did more tests other than weight gain (which returned to control levels), social interaction, elevated plus-maze, and corticosterone levels. They measured social avoidance, but I’m curious if there was also an increase in distress. Why did they measure CORT levels after forced swimming rather than the traumatic reminder of a CD-1 mouse? I wish they measured changes in aggression or changes in sleep that are also characteristic of PTSD. However, I still think that it is a good model to use, as the second paper uses it to discuss neural pathways.
            I found it extremely interesting that in the conclusion of the second paper, the authors mentioned that understanding these circuits would provide insight into conditions like social anxiety and schizophrenia but failed to mention antisocial personality disorder. The two groups that observed a demonstrator being shocked on cue both exhibited increased freezing. Those two groups also had higher social interactions with the demonstrators, driven by the observation of distress, which the authors suggested could reflect empathy. Given that a hallmark characteristic of antisocial personality disorder is a lack of empathy, I’m very curious to see if this pathway has any implications in that disorder. I’m unsure if there are animal models for antisocial personality disorder. I would be curious to see the individual differences in this experiment of the mice who froze in correspondence to the cue to see if some mice inherently froze more for the demonstrator. Are there ever any mice that wouldn’t freeze at all? Or is this emotional contagion so necessary for survival purposes that a complete lack of it doesn’t exist in mice?

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