4.2 Article

Influence of Genetic Background on Apathy-Like Behavior in Triple Transgenic AD Mice

期刊

CURRENT ALZHEIMER RESEARCH
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 942-949

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/1567205013666160404120106

关键词

Apathy; behavior; C99; LTP; immunohistochemistry; triple transgenic mice; genetic background

资金

  1. LABEX (excellence laboratory, program investment for the future) DISTALZ (Development of Innovative Strategies for a Transdisciplinary approach to Alzheimer's disease
  2. university hospital Federation (FHU OncoAge)
  3. Conseil Departemantal des Alpes Maritimes
  4. Innovation Alzheimer association
  5. CoBTek research group

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Apathy is an early and common neuropsychiatric syndrome in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. In clinical trials, apathy is associated with decreased motor activity that can be monitored by actigraphy. The triple transgenic mouse AD model (3xTgAD) has been shown to recapitulate the biochemical lesions as well as many of the synaptic and cognitive alterations associated with AD. In the present work we found that these mice also develop an early and consistent apathy-like behavior as evidenced by a drastic decrease in spontaneous activity measured by actimetry. We recently established that these mice also display an intraneuronal accumulation of the beta-secretase-derived beta APP fragment (C99) appearing early, in absence of A beta. Interestingly, we found that the apathy-like behavior observed in 3xTgAD mice was temporally associated with C99 accumulation and synaptic alterations. Since it is well known that the genetic background can strongly influence behavior and can induce transcriptional variability in animal models, we decided to determine the influence of genetic background on the above-described alterations. We backcrossed 3xTgAD mice to C57BL/6 and found that the genetic background had no influence on either C99 accumulation or synaptic plasticity alterations, but strongly affected the apathy-like behavior.

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

4.2
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