4.5 Article

Hyper-response to Novelty Increases c-Fos Expression in the Hippocampus and Prefrontal Cortex in a Rat Model of Schizophrenia

期刊

NEUROCHEMICAL RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 441-448

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s11064-017-2439-x

关键词

Animal model; CA1 region of hippocampus; c-Fos; Novel environment; Prefrontal cortex; Schizophrenia

资金

  1. Vicerrectoria de Investigacion y Estudios de Posgrado (VIEP)
  2. Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla (BUAP) [98-FLAG-2017]
  3. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACYT) Mexico [252808]
  4. International Brain Research Organization (IBRO)
  5. CONACYT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Schizophrenia is a debilitating disorder that may have a neurodevelopmental origin. For this reason, animal models based on neonatal insults or manipulations have been extensively used to demonstrate schizophrenia-related behaviors. Among those, the neonatal ventral hippocampus lesion (nVHL) is largely used as a model of schizophrenia-related behavior as it mimics behavioral and neurochemical abnormalities often seen in schizophrenic patients including hyperlocomotion in a novel environment. To investigate the neuroanatomical basis of coding novelty in the nVHL rat, we assessed the behavioral locomotor activity paradigm in a novel environment and measured expression of c-Fos, a marker of neural activation, in brain regions involved in the process of coding novelty or locomotion. Upon reaching adulthood, nVHL rats showed hyperlocomotion in the novel environment paradigm. Moreover, in nVHL rats the expression of c-Fos was greater in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and CA1 region of the dorsal hippocampus compared to sham rats. Whereas similar expression of c-Fos was observed in the basolateral amygdala, nucleus accumbens and dentate gyrus region of hippocampus of nVHL and sham rats. These results suggest that the nVHL disrupts the neural activity in the PFC and CA1 region of hippocampus in the process of coding novelty in the rat.

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

4.5
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