4.7 Review

Toxin-Induced Experimental Models of Learning and Memory Impairment

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms17091447

关键词

animal model; cognition; dementia; learning; memory; toxin

资金

  1. Leading Human Resource Training Program of Regional Neo industry through National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) [NRF-2016H1D5A190 9610]
  2. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) [116018-03-1-HD040]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Animal models for learning and memory have significantly contributed to novel strategies for drug development and hence are an imperative part in the assessment of therapeutics. Learning and memory involve different stages including acquisition, consolidation, and retrieval and each stage can be characterized using specific toxin. Recent studies have postulated the molecular basis of these processes and have also demonstrated many signaling molecules that are involved in several stages of memory. Most insights into learning and memory impairment and to develop a novel compound stems from the investigations performed in experimental models, especially those produced by neurotoxins models. Several toxins have been utilized based on their mechanism of action for learning and memory impairment such as scopolamine, streptozotocin, quinolinic acid, and domoic acid. Further, some toxins like 6-hydroxy dopamine (6-OHDA), 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) and amyloid- are known to cause specific learning and memory impairment which imitate the disease pathology of Parkinson's disease dementia and Alzheimer's disease dementia. Apart from these toxins, several other toxins come under a miscellaneous category like an environmental pollutant, snake venoms, botulinum, and lipopolysaccharide. This review will focus on the various classes of neurotoxin models for learning and memory impairment with their specific mechanism of action that could assist the process of drug discovery and development for dementia and cognitive disorders.

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