4.6 Article

Effects of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, MK-801, on spatial memory and influence of the route of administration

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 372, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2019.112067

关键词

i.p. and s.c. administration route; MK-801; Morris water maze; Pharmacokinetics; Spatial learning; Memory

资金

  1. EU-ERA-NET NEURON project CnsAflame
  2. ERDF [1.1.1.2/VIAA/1/16/244]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, MK-801, is widely used to induce memory and learning impairments in preclinical studies. MK-801 is mainly injected intraperitoneally (i.p.) at doses that result in cognitive impairment and induction of motor or sensory disturbances. The aim of this study was to compare the behavioral outcomes when different administration routes (subcutaneous (s.c.) and i.p.) and MK-801 doses (0.01, 0.05, and 0.1 mg/kg) are employed in the Morris water maze (MWM) task. We also assessed the pharmacokinetics of MK-801 in rat blood plasma and its bioavailability in brain tissue. The concentrations of MK-801 in brain tissue and blood plasma were significantly higher after s.c. than i.p. administration. MK-801 administered via the s.c. route at doses of 0.1 and 0.05 mg/kg significantly impaired learning on all training days in the MWM task compared to i.p. administration at the same doses. Memory in the probe trial was significantly impaired after MK-801 administration via both routes at all doses. MK-801 also induced locomotor disturbances after i.p. and s.c. administration at the highest dose (0.1 mg/kg). Our data suggest that s.c. administration leads to higher MK-801 concentrations in brain tissue and blood plasma and evidently impairs spatial learning and memory compared to i.p. administration at the same dose. Knowledge of MK-801 concentrations in the brain and blood and the effects of the compound on memory processes and locomotor activity enable the choice of more targeted routes and doses of administration in preclinical studies.

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