4.4 Article

Nitric Oxide Regulates Activity-Dependent Neuroprotective Protein (ADNP) in the Dentate Gyrus of the Rodent Model of Kainic Acid-Induced Seizure

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR NEUROSCIENCE
卷 39, 期 1-2, 页码 9-21

出版社

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12031-008-9169-0

关键词

NOS blockers; cGMP; sGC blocker; Hilar neurons; Dentate granule cells

资金

  1. Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool
  2. Department of Pathology
  3. Safety Assessment
  4. AstraZeneca
  5. Macclesfield, UK
  6. Medical Research Council [G0701003] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. MRC [G0701003] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dentate gyrus (DG) of the normal rat brain contains activity-dependent neuroprotective protein (ADNP) which is widely distributed in the cytoplasm of neurons and astrocytes. Treatment with nitric oxide (NO) synthase (NOS) inhibitor N-G-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester (l-NAME) caused a decrease in ADNP expression in granule cells which persisted 3 days post-treatment. However, treatment with neuronal-specific NOS inhibitor, 7-nitroindazole (7-NI), or soluble guanylyl cyclase inhibitor, ODQ, did not change ADNP expression in the DG. We have previously shown that kainic acid (KA)-induced seizure increases neuronal NOS in neurons and inducible NOS in glia cells and suppresses ADNP in the hippocampus (Cosgrave et al., Neurobiol Dis 30(3):281-292, 2008). In the DG, l-NAME treatment prior to KA causes ADNP synthesis in granule cells by 3 h which was later restricted to the subgranular zone by 3 days. 7-NI and ODQ had no effect. Double immunostaining for neuronal marker NeuN and ADNP revealed a significant decrease of both ADNP(+) neurons and of total neuron numbers (NeuN(+)) in the hilus of animals having KA-induced seizure that had been pretreated with l-NAME implying that NO and ADNP may act together to protect hilar neurons. Overall, these observations suggest that NO regulates ADNP in the DG under both basal and pathophysiological conditions.

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

4.4
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