4.7 Article

Sex- and Estrus-Dependent Differences in Rat Basolateral Amygdala

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 37, 期 44, 页码 10567-10586

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0758-17.2017

关键词

amygdala; electrophysiology; estrous; fear extinction; female

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01-MH-084970, R01-MH-100536]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Depression and anxiety are diagnosed almost twice as often in women, and the symptomology differs in men and women and is sensitive to sex hormones. The basolateral amygdala (BLA) contributes to emotion-related behaviors that differ between males and females and across the reproductive cycle. This hints at sex-or estrus-dependent features of BLA function, about which very little is known. The purpose of this study was to test whether there are sex differences or estrouscyclicity in rat BLA physiology and to determine their mechanistic correlates. We found substantial sex differences in the activity of neurons in lateral nuclei (LAT) and basal nuclei (BA) of the BLA that were associated with greater excitatory synaptic input in females. We also found strong differences in the activity of LAT and BA neurons across the estrous cycle. These differences were associated with a shift in the inhibition-excitation balance such that LAT had relatively greater inhibition during proestrus which paralleled more rapid cued fear extinction. In contrast, BA had relatively greater inhibition during diestrus that paralleled more rapid contextual fear extinction. These results are the first to demonstrate sex differences in BLA neuronal activity and the impact of estrous cyclicity on these measures. The shift between LAT and BA predominance across the estrous cycle provides a simple construct for understanding the effects of the estrous cycle on BLA-dependent behaviors. These results provide a novel framework to understand the cyclicity of emotional memory and highlight the importance of considering ovarian cycle when studying the BLA of females.

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