4.5 Article

Dopamine receptor mRNA and protein expression in the mouse corpus striatum and cerebral cortex during pre- and postnatal development

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1156, 期 -, 页码 31-45

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.04.043

关键词

dopamine receptor; striatum; cerebral cortex; ganglionic eminence

资金

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [DA020796, R01 DA020796, R01 DA020796-01A1] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [P30NS45776, P30 NS045776, R01 NS043426-05, P30 NS045776-04, NS43426, R01 NS043426, R01 NS043426-04, P30 NS045776-05] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The outcome of dopaminergic signaling and effectiveness of dopaminergic drugs depend on the relative preponderance of each of the five dopamine receptors in a given brain region. The separate contribution of each receptor to overall dopaminergic tone is difficult to establish at a functional level due to lack of receptor subtype specific pharmacological agents. A surrogate for receptor function is receptor protein or mRNA expression. We examined dopamine receptor mRNA expression by quantitative reverse transcription real-time PCR in the striatum, globus pallidus, frontal cortex and cingulate cortex of embryonic and postnatal mice. Samples of each region were collected by laser capture microdissection. D1- and D2-receptor mRNAs were the most abundant in all the regions of the mature brain. The D1-receptor was predominant over the D2-receptor in the frontal and cingulate cortices whereas the situation was reversed in the striatum and globus pallidus. In the proliferative domains of the embryonic forebrain, D3-, D4- and D5-receptors were predominant. In the corpus striatum and cerebral cortex, the D3- and D4-receptors were the only receptors that showed marked developmental regulation. By analyzing D1 receptor protein expression, we show that developmental changes in mRNA expression reliably translate into changes in protein levels, at least for the D1-receptor. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.5
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