Skip to main content

Gut-Brain

By
            The papers this week were extremely interesting. I have very little knowledge about how our gut microbiome affects us, so these papers were quite shocking to me. The Buffington paper especially, stood out. It was well organized, well explained, and I am completely in agreement with the conclusions. Developing a non-invasive treatment for patients through probiotics would be amazing. More research obviously needs to be done, but I think this paper does a good job at establishing how one species of bacteria can affect the whole organism. I liked how the researchers brought in ASD because it was very clear what the clinical significance of this paper is. Since an increasingly amount of people in the United States are becoming obese, this topic is currently very relevant as well. Since rodents and people are different, I’d be very curious to see what the comparison of the gut microbiome is between humans with high fat diets compared to low fat diets. Unlike a lot of animal models, taking stool samples can easily be done in humans.
            The Reber paper was a little less convincing for me. I was confused about their conclusion about anxiolytic effects, because from figure 1D the only significant difference was between the CSC and SHC groups, both of which received the immunization. There were no differences amongst the immunized and non-immunized groups. There was also no difference in the vehicle mice. The other issue that I had was in the microglia density test, they only looked at the CSC-exposed mice. I wish they looked at the SHC mice to see the effects of this immunization on non-stressed mice. Overall, though, I think this whole field of study has so much significance. We always talk about how many more factors affect humans over mice, but we can study the differences in human gut microbiomes with healthy individuals compared to non-healthy individuals and then work towards developing treatments. Again, I don’t know anything about this field, but just reading these papers, it seems very promising.

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

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

Ramirez et al.: 2013 and 2015 Papers

By
In these papers, Ramirez et al. strive to understand how memory encoding via optogenetic manipulation of engram-bearing cells in the hippocampus, specifically the dentate gyrus, can affect an animal’s response to a stressful context.  The first paper, published in 2013, was crucial to the field as it introduced this very exciting technique; in this paper, Ramirez et al. use tet-tag to manipulate brain circuity and establish associations between two contexts. Throughout the paper, this is referred to as “false memories.” Using these artificial memories, the investigators are able to manipulate the animal’s fear response in a specific context. Specifically, after the animals are conditioned to a repeated fearful stimulus (a foot shock, in context B), activation of the involved DG cells in a different context (context A’) will also initiate a fear response (in absence of any foot shock). In this experiment, the false memory is used to create an unnatural fear association in a given...
Post a Comment
Read more