4.7 Article

fMRI detects bilateral brain network activation following unilateral chemogenetic activation of direct striatal projection neurons

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 220, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117079

关键词

Designer receptors exclusively activated by designer drugs; Magnetic resonance imaging; Clozapine; Clozapine-N-Oxide; Striatum; Drd1-receptor-expressing striatal projection neurons

资金

  1. Inserm
  2. Sorbonne University
  3. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale (FRM) [DPA20140629798]
  4. ANR [ANR-16-CE16-0018]
  5. Fondation de France [00086313]
  6. Federation pour la recherche sur le cerveau (FRC)
  7. Rotary Espoir en Tete
  8. DIM Cerveau et Pensee Region Ile-de-France
  9. Uehara Memorial Foundation [201430033]
  10. Fyssen Foundation fellowship
  11. Idex Paris-Saclay
  12. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-16-CE16-0018] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Abnormal structural and functional connectivity in the striatum during neurological disorders has been reported using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), although the effects of cell-type specific neuronal stimulation on fMRI and related behavioral alterations are not well understood. In this study, we combined DREADD technology with fMRI (chemo-fMRI) to investigate alterations of spontaneous neuronal activity. These were induced by the unilateral activation of dopamine D1 receptor-expressing neurons (D1-neurons) in the mouse dorsal striatum (DS). After clozapine (CLZ) stimulation of the excitatory DREADD expressed in Dl-neurons, the fractional amplitude of low frequency fluctuations (fALFF) increased bilaterally in the medial thalamus, nucleus accumbens and cortex. In addition, we found that the gamma-band of local field potentials was increased in the stimulated DS and cortex bilaterally. These results provide insights for better interpretation of cell type-specific activity changes in fMRI.

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

4.7
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