4.3 Article

Relationship between non-functional masticatory activity and central dopamine in stressed rats

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION
Volume 37, Issue 11, Pages 827-833

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02110.x

Keywords

bruxism; stress; dopamine; coping behaviour; microdialysis

Funding

  1. University of the Basque Country [05/137]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>In humans, diurnal tooth-clenching and other oral stereotyped behaviour are associated with stress/anxiety. In rodents, gnawing/biting of objects is observed during exposure to stress. Both nigrostriatal and mesocortical dopaminergic systems are involved in the development of this coping behaviour. To clarify the relationship between central dopaminergic activity and stress-induced parafunctional masticatory behaviour, using microdialysis in vivo, we assessed the changes in extracellular dopamine concentrations in both prefrontal cortex and striatum of rats subjected to a mild tail pinch. The animals were divided into two groups according to the degree of non-functional masticatory activity (NFMA) displayed during exposure to tail pinch. In prefrontal cortex, rats which displayed severe NFMA showed a greater increase in extracellular dopamine concentration in relation to basal values (Emax = 184 +/- 26%) than those which did not display this coping behaviour (Emax = 139 +/- 23%) (F-NFMA[1,86] = 3 center dot 97; P < 0 center dot 05) (n = 17). A positive association was also found between cortical dopamine maximal value from baseline and the degree of NFMA displayed (r = 0 center dot 36; P < 0 center dot 05) (n = 17). There were no significant differences in the tail-pinch-induced striatal dopamine increase between both groups of rats (Emax = 130 +/- 10%) (n = 17). These results provide further evidence in support of prefrontal dopamine playing a relevant role in the expression of stress-induced masticatory coping behaviour.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available