4.1 Article

A Novel Animal Model of Parkinson's Disease Using Optogenetics: Representation of Various Disease Stages by Modulating the Illumination Parameter

期刊

STEREOTACTIC AND FUNCTIONAL NEUROSURGERY
卷 96, 期 1, 页码 22-32

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000486644

关键词

Animal model; Halorhodopsin; Optogenetics; Parkinson's disease

资金

  1. Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute - Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [HI16C2188]
  2. Asan Life Science Institute Grant from the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea [16-241]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The classic animal model of Parkinson's disease (PD) using neurotoxin can only simulate fixed stages of the disease by causing irreversible damage to the nigrostriatal system. Objectives: To develop an optogenetic PD model that can modulate the severity of disease by optical stimulation by introducing the halorhodopsin (NpHR) gene into the substantia nigra compacta. Methods: Fifteen rats received injections of engineered AAV with NpHR-YFP gene into the substantia nigra. They were then subjected to illumination of 590-nm light wavelengths with 3 optical stimulation conditions, i.e., frequency-width: 5 Hz-10 ms (n = 5), 5 Hz-100 ms (n = 5), and 50 Hz-10 ms (n = 5). Eleven rats received 6-hydroxydopamine injections to establish the conventional PD model. Results: The optogenetic models showed characteristic PD manifestations, similar to those of the conventional models; the severity of forelimb akinesia correlated with the total illumination value (frequency x width). The group with a low illumination value (5 Hz-10 ms) was comparable to the conventional partial model whereas the groups with high illumination values (5 Hz-100 ms and 50 Hz-10 ms) were similar to the conventional complete model. Conclusions: An optogenetic PD model has the advantage of more appropriately representing various PD stages by controlling illumination parameters. (c) 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.

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

4.1
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