4.5 Article

Effects of estrogen on basal forebrain cholinergic neurons and spatial learning

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH
Volume 86, Issue 7, Pages 1588-1598

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/jnr.21609

Keywords

choline acetyltransferase; p75(NTR); hippocampus; Barnes maze; ovariectomy

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Estrogen receptors are expressed in several areas of the brain associated with cognition, including the basal forebrain cholinergic nuclei, and numerous reports have described improvements in memory in response to estrogen supplementation. The relationship between estrogen's effects on the basal cholinergic system and improvements in cognitive function, however, are obscure. We therefore undertook a study to determine the effects of estrogen on several parameters of the cholinergic system in ovariectomized rats and measured the concomitant effects on performance in the Barnes maze, a test of spatial memory. Six weeks of estradiol treatment caused an increase in choline acetyltransferase activity throughout the projection fields of the basal forebrain, including the hippocampal formation (14%), olfactory bulb (30%), and cerebral cortex (35%). Estrogen treatment also caused an increase in cell soma size of cholinergic neurons in the horizontal diagonal limb of the band of Broca and in the basal nucleus of Meynert. There was no change in the number of neurons positive for p75(NTR), nor in the level of p75(NTR) expression per neuron. Barnes maze performance was markedly improved after estradiol treatment, reinforcing the view that estrogen has beneficial cognitive effects, particularly on spatial memory. The beneficial cognitive effect was likely mediated in part by stimulation of the basal forebrain cholinergic system, especially in its neocortical projection, but was not associated with changes in the level of p75(NTR) expression. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available