Skip to main content

Post 6: Genetic and environmental effects on mouse models of Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is an extremely complex disorder that, like most other psychological disorders, can be impacted by numerous genetic and environmental factors before and after birth. Ayhan et al. and Burrows et al. both explore some of these factors and how they affect neuronal morphology, behavior, and biochemistry in mouse models of schizophrenia. I was excited to see that both papers utilized both male and female disease models, but I was somewhat surprised by the lack of sex effects reported by Burrows, especially given the differential timeline and manifestations of schizophrenia in men and women. I imagine that the lack of sex effects in Burrows, as compared to significant sex effects in Ayhan, may be due to the fact that different genes/proteins with different functions are being manipulated and those manipulations are occurring in different ways. Perhaps the fact that DISC1 is scaffold protein that has a wide range of proteins it binds to accounts, in part, for the presentation of sex differences not seen with mGlu5. Ayhan did report different results between sexes in behavior, monoamine content, and responses to drugs, but did not find any underlying differences in brain morphology or monoamine levels. It seems that further research could be conducted to identify possible sources of differentiation between males and females. I found it especially interesting that some of the behavioral results seem to reflect those seen in humans (females showing more depression-like behaviors and males showing more aggressive behaviors) and would be interested in further exploration to see if this apparent similarity is significant. 

While reading these papers, I also became interested in the importance of temporal precision of the methods in both papers. In Ayhan, the Tet-off system is used with Dox-containing food to temporally control expression of hDISC1 in pre- and post-natal mice. Because so many aspects of development are time-dependent, I wonder how precise this method can be prenatally, and whether results for the prenatal group would differ if Dox was delivered at a different embryonic timepoint. As for Burrows, I am very curious about how changing the timing of environmental enrichment might influence its efficacy in modulating schizophrenia-like impairments. Perhaps earlier postnatal environmental enrichment could further improve schizophrenia-like effects in mGlu5 KO animals. Additionally, I wonder if environmental enrichment of a pregnant mouse could improve the outcome of her offspring, leading to an improved prenatal environment—which can be an important factor contributing to schizophrenia risk. Having a greater understanding of internal and external factors related to schizophrenia during adulthood as well as development is crucial to understanding and decreasing risk of disease. 

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...