4.6 Article

The Adult Ts65Dn Mouse Model of Down Syndrome Shows Altered Swallow Function

Journal

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2019.00906

Keywords

deglutition; deglutition disorders; swallow; Down syndrome; mouse; VFSS; Ts65Dn; Dp(16)1Yey

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) [F32 DC014885, R01DC008149, R01DC014358]
  2. Jerome Lejeune Foundation [1326]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are increased risks for deglutition disorders in people with Down syndrome (DS). Although mouse models have been used to study the biological underpinnings of DS in other areas, relatively little is known about swallowing phenotypes in these models. We hypothesized that swallowing performance would be affected in adult mouse models of DS, relative to typical control mice. Videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS) were conducted on adults of two mouse models of DS: Ts65Dn and Dp(16)1Yey, and evaluated in comparison with age-matched controls. Relative to other groups, adult Ts65Dn showed significantly slower swallow rates, longer inter-swallow intervals (ISI), and greater numbers of jaw excursion cycles preceding each swallow. In contrast, adult Dp(16)1Yey mice showed swallowing performance similar to control mice. Exploratory quantitative analyses of the intrinsic tongue (transverse muscle), and extrinsic tongue muscles [genioglossus (GG), styloglossus (SG), and hyoglossus (HG)] showed no significantdifferences between genotype groups in myosin heavy chain isoform profiles. Collectively, these findings suggest that while swallowing is typical in adult Dp(16)1Yey, swallowing in adult Ts65Dn is atypical due to unknown causes. The finding that adult Ts65Dn may have utility as a model of dysphagia provides new opportunities to elucidate biological underpinnings of dysphagia associated with DS.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available