4.4 Article

Peripheral lipopolysaccharide administration transiently affects expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, corticotropin and proopiomelanocortin in mouse brain

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 429, 期 1, 页码 69-73

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2007.09.067

关键词

brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF); corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH); hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis; peripheral LPS; proopiomelanocortin; POMC; synaptic sites

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Peripheral inflammation induced by intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is known to cause functional impairments in the brain affecting memory and learning. One of mechanisms may be the interference with neurotrophin (NT) expression and function. In the current study we administered a single, high dose of LPS (3 mg/kg, i.p.) into mice and investigated changes in brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene expression within 1-6 days after LPS injection. Crude synaptosomes were isolated from brain tissue and subjected to Western-blot analyses. We found transient reductions in synaptosomal proBDNF- and BDNF protein expression, with a maximal decrease at day 3 as compared to saline injected controls. The time course of reduction of BDNF mRNA in whole brain extracts parallels the decrease in protein levels in synaptosomes. LPS effects in the central nervous system (CNS) are known to crucially involve the activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. We analysed the time course of corticotropin releasing hormone (CRH)- and proopiomelanocortin (POMC) mRNA expression. As observed for BDNF-, CRH- and POMC mRNA levels are also significantly reduced on day 3 indicating a comparable time course. These results suggest that peripheral inflammation causes a reduction of trophic supply in the brain, including BDNF at synaptic sites. The mechanisms involved could be a negative feedback of the activated HPA axis. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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