4.2 Article

Ebselen prevents chronic alcohol-induced rat hippocampal stress and functional impairment

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00329.x

关键词

hippocampus; ethanol; learning; oxidation; long-term potentiation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Most of the previously published data suggest a role for oxidative or nitrosative stress in ethanol-induced nervous system damage. Moreover, ethanol is able to impair learning abilities in adult mammalian brain, a process suggested to be directly related to hippocampal neurogenesis. Ebselen, a synthetic compound with antioxidant properties, is able to prevent ethanol-induced impairment of neurogenesis in adult rats. The aim of the present work was to further demonstrate the ability of ebselen to prevent biochemical alterations, and preserve long-term potentiation (LTP) and learning abilities, in the hippocampus of chronic alcoholic adult rats. Methods: Biochemical markers of oxidative stress (glutathione and malondialdehyde) were assayed in hippocampi of control rats and animals fed a liquid alcoholic diet (Lieber-De Carli) supplemented or not with ebselen. Long-term potentiation and hippocampal-dependent tests were studied in all animal groups. Results: The hippocampal concentrations of glutathione and malondialdehyde were decreased and increased, respectively, in alcohol-treated animals, and did not differ from those of the control and the alcohol+ebselen groups. Long-term potentiation in hippocampal slices from ethanol-treated animals was prevented, when compared with controls, and occurred with a similar profile in control animals and in the alcohol+ebselen groups. Learning ability was tested with the Morris water maze test. Escape latencies were higher in ethanol-treated rats than in control animals or the ones treated with ethanol+ebselen. Conclusions: The results herein strongly suggest that oxidative mechanisms may underlie the hippocampal effects of ethanol in adult rats, in view of the protective effect of ebselen.

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

4.2
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