Skip to main content

Blog Post 9- Venniro et al (2018) & de Guglielmo et al (2019)

By



Already from reading the title of the Venniro et al (2018) paper, I became interested in finding out how the researchers were able to exceed the effect of social interactions over drug choice in rats that were already previously exposed to drug addiction. Throughout the paper I wondered how the two different factors addiction and social interaction could be so closely compared to each other in terms of reward- as their effects are relatively dissimilar in strength. From my understanding, being addicted to drugs and simply abstaining from the drug is more complex than what appears to be presented in the paper, specifically for affected humans. The aim of most animal research is to explain behavioral findings towards a clinical application as well. Therefore, if these findings were to be applied to human drug addiction, then going out to a social event or improving one’s social stimuli should improve their drug addictive behaviors. This is not what has been seen in human drug addicts, as some affected individuals even appear to relapse again after exposure to social pressure. Therefore, the researchers do not enable a correctly established clinical application of the findings throughout their study. They did include a section in the discussion about how the presented results of rats would differ to that of humans. I would be interested in reading more about how exactly these applications could be improved through future experiments. 
The second paper by de Guglielmo et al (2019) was an extension of the topic of addiction but with a large emphasis on optogenetics. Since we discussed optogenetics a lot in the beginning of the course, it was interesting to see it again in a new context. Drug addiction has different components to it, meaning it can exist as both impulsive and compulsive states. In this paper, the researchers only appear to test the effect of CRF activity during the compulsive state of abuse, which clearly is the more severe state of the two. However, the researchers could have also compared and contrasted these findings with impulsive states as well to see how data may differ. As mentioned in my blog post last week, I was curious to learn more about tolerance and withdrawal. These findings allowed for a better understanding of the particular aspects of research. Thus, the researchers succeeded in explaining that the CRF pathway involving the Central Amygdala (CeA) and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) were essential in alcohol withdrawal in rats. However, the CRF is an essential component in the HPA-axis and thereby stress response. de Guglielmo et al did not mention this specifically, so I would appreciate more information on the effect that stress itself may have on drug addiction in future research.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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. (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