Skip to main content

Final Paper Proposal

One topic that has particularly fascinated me is the effects of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDC) on the brain. Chemicals that are prevalent in people's everyday lives, like Bisphenol-A (BPA) and phthalates, found in canned goods and plasticizers, respectively, can have profound impacts on brain function. Though BPA and phthalates are some of the most common EDC's, many others exist in products such as pesticides, herbicides and cosmetics. Interestingly, these effects can persist across multiple generations, altering the neurodevelopment of offspring that were never exposed to these EDC's first-hand. However, robust effects are also seen in animal models where the first generation were directly exposed to a specific EDC.

The reason I find EDC's so interesting is because the dysfunction they cause is a direct result of environmental exposure. Not only do these exogenous chemicals have detrimental consequences for the organism that is exposed to them, but for their offspring as well. These consequences include impaired hippocampal neurogenesis and altered gene expression in structures like the amygdala, hypothalamus (Hatcher, 2019) and PFC (Sadowski, 2014). To add another layer of complexity, many studies consider both males and females, noting sexual dimorphisms in how endocrine disruptors affect the brain and, in turn, behavior. Therefore, I think it is relevant to consider how epigenetic and neurodevelopmental changes due to EDC exposure can predispose individuals to psychiatric disorders such as PTSD, anxiety and schizophrenia in both males and females.


Sources:

Hatcher, K. M., Willing, J., Chiang, C., Rattan, S., Flaws, J. A., & Mahoney, M. M. (2019). Exposure to di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate transgenerationally alters anxiety-like behavior and amygdala gene expression in adult male and female mice. Physiology and Behavior, 207, 7-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.04.018


Jang, Y.J., Park, H.R., Kim, T.H., Yang, W., Lee, J., Choi, S.Y., Oh, S.B., Lee, E., Park, J., Kim, H., Kim, H.S., & Lee, J. (2012). High dose bisphenol A impairs hippocampal neurogenesis in female mice across generations. Toxicology, 296 1-3, 73-82 .

Kitraki E, Nalvarte I, Alavian-Ghavanini A, Rüegg J. Developmental exposure to bisphenol A alters expression and DNA methylation of Fkbp5, an important regulator of the stress response. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology. 2015 Dec;417:191-199. DOI: 10.1016/j.mce.2015.09.028.

Sadowski, R.N., Wise, L.M., Park, P.Y., Schantz, S.L., & Juraska, J.M. (2014). Early exposure to bisphenol A alters neuron and glia number in the rat prefrontal cortex of adult males, but not females. Neuroscience, 279, 122-131.

Skinner MK, Anway MD, Savenkova MI, Gore AC, Crews D (2008) Transgenerational Epigenetic Programming of the Brain Transcriptome and Anxiety Behavior. PLoS ONE 3(11): e3745. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003745





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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 ...

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

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...

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

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...