4.6 Review

Functional significance of central D1 receptors in cognition: beyond working memory

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
卷 32, 期 7, 页码 1248-1258

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2011.194

关键词

cognition; D1 receptors; dopamine; positron emission tomography; psychiatry

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (MEXT)
  2. Takeda Science Foundation [23120009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The role of dopamine D1 receptors in prefrontal cortex function, including working memory, is well acknowledged. However, relatively little is known about their role in other cognitive or emotional functions. We measured both D1 and D2 receptors in the brain using positron emission tomography in healthy subjects, with the aim of elucidating how regional D1 and D2 receptors are differentially involved in cognitive and emotional functions beyond working memory. We found an inverted U-shaped relation between prefrontal D1 receptor availability and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test performance, indicating that too little or too much D1 receptor stimulation impairs working memory or set shifting. In addition, variability of D1 receptor availability in the amygdala and striatum was related to individual differences in emotional responses and decision-making processes, respectively. These observations suggest that the variability of available D1 receptors might be associated with individual differences in brain functions that require phasic dopamine release. An interdisciplinary approach combining molecular imaging of dopamine neurotransmission with cognitive neuroscience and clinical psychiatry will provide new perspectives for understanding the neurobiology of neuropsychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, addiction and Parkinson's disease, as well as novel therapeutics for cognitive impairments observed in them. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2012) 32, 1248-1258; doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2011.194; published online 11 January 2012

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据