4.6 Article

Functional Deficiency of Interneurons and Negative BOLD fMRI Response

期刊

CELLS
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells12050811

关键词

rabbit; neurovascular coupling; picrotoxin; somatosensory; GABA; excitatory-inhibitory balance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to simulate the functional deficiency of interneurons by injecting the GABA antagonist, picrotoxin. The results showed that after picrotoxin administration, neuronal activity increased, the BOLD responses to stimulation became negative, and the brain tissue oxygen levels nearly disappeared.
The functional deficiency of the inhibitory system typically appears during development and can progress to psychiatric disorders or epilepsy, depending on its severity, in later years. It is known that interneurons, the major source of GABAergic inhibition in the cerebral cortex, can make direct connections with arterioles and participate in the regulation of vasomotion. The goal of this study was to mimic the functional deficiency of interneurons through the use of localized microinjections of the GABA antagonist, picrotoxin, in such a concentration that it did not elicit epileptiform neuronal activity. First, we recorded the dynamics of resting-state neuronal activity in response to picrotoxin injections in the somatosensory cortex of an awake rabbit; second, we assessed the altered neuronal and hemodynamic responses to whisker stimulation using BOLD fMRI and electrophysiology recordings; third, we evaluated brain tissue oxygen levels before and after picrotoxin injection. Our results showed that neuronal activity typically increased after picrotoxin administration, the BOLD responses to stimulation became negative, and the oxygen response was nearly abolished. Vasoconstriction during the resting baseline was not observed. These results indicate that picrotoxin provoked imbalanced hemodynamics either due to increased neuronal activity, decreased vascular response, or a combination of both.

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