4.7 Article

Airjet and FG-7142-induced Fos expression differs in rats selectively bred for high and low anxiety-related behavior

Journal

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 8, Pages 1048-1058

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2006.02.008

Keywords

anxiety; panic; benzodiazepine; functional imaging; Fos mapping; high anxiety-related behavior (HAB)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We reported recently that two rat lines bred for either high (HAB) or low (LAB) anxiety-related behavior display differential Fos expression in restricted parts of the fear/anxiety circuitry when exposed to mild anxiety evoked in exploratory anxiety tests. Since different forms of anxiety are thought to activate different parts of the anxiety circuitry, we investigated now whether (1) an aversive stimulus which elicits escape behavior (airjet) and (2) the anxiogenic/panicogenic drug FG-7142 would reveal further differences in Fos expression as a marker of neuronal activation between HAB and LAB rats. Both airjet exposure and FG-7142 induced Fos expression in both lines in various anxiety-related brain areas. HAB rats, which displayed exaggerated escape responses during airjet exposure, exhibited increased Fos expression in brain areas including the hypothalamus, periaqueductal gray and locus coeruleus, as well as blunted Fos activation in the cingulate cortex in response to airjet and/or FG-7142. The results corroborate previous findings showing that trait anxiety affects neuronal excitability in hypothalamic and medial prefrontal areas. Furthermore, by using airjet as well as FG-7142, we now reveal that enhanced trait anxiety is also associated with neuronal hyperexcitability in the locus coeruleus and the periaqueductal gray, suggesting that investigation of an array of different anxiogenic stimuli is important for the detection of altered neuronal processing in trait anxiety. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available