4.5 Article

Evidence for a role of inhibition of orexinergic neurons in the anxiolytic and sedative effects of diazepam: A c-Fos study

期刊

PHARMACOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY AND BEHAVIOR
卷 101, 期 1, 页码 115-124

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pbb.2011.12.011

关键词

c-Fos; Benzodiazepine; Diazepam; Orexin; Dopamine; Anxiety; Sedation

资金

  1. Academy of Finland
  2. Sigrid Juselius Foundation
  3. Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies
  4. Helsinki Biomedical Graduate School (HBGS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The classical benzodiazepine diazepam (DZ) induces anxiolysis at low doses and sedation and hypnosis at higher doses. Different brain areas and neuronal populations most likely mediate these different behavioral effects. We used c-Fos immunohistochemistry as an indirect way to study neuronal activation or inhibition induced by DZ at anxiolytic and sedative doses (0.5 and 5 mg/kg, respectively) in various brain areas involved in anxiety, arousal, sedation and addiction in C57BL/6J mice. We also focused on the two neuronal populations, orexinergic and dopaminergic neuronal populations, with the help of double-immunohistochemistry using c-Fos and orexin-A antibodies and c-Fos and tyrosine hydroxylase antibodies. We found that different brain areas of unhabituated mice reacted differently to the mild stress induced by vehicle injection. Also the response to anxiolytic or sedative doses of DZ differed between the areas, suggesting that distinct brain areas mediate the behavioral effects of low and high DZ doses. Our findings propose a role for inhibition of orexin neurons in the anxiolytic and sleep-promoting effects of DZ. In addition, the activation of central amygdala neurons by DZ treatment was associated with anxiolytic and sedative effects. On the other hand, the ventral hippocampus, basolateral amygdala, ventral tegmental area and prefrontal cortex were sensitive even to the mild injection stress, but not to the anxiolytic dose of DZ. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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