4.5 Article

High fat/refined carbohydrate diet enhances the susceptibility to spatial learning deficits in rats exposed to intermittent hypoxia

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1090, 期 -, 页码 190-196

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.03.046

关键词

high fat diet; sleep apnea; CREB; intermittent hypoxia; sleep disordered breathing

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL69932, HL65270] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Intermittent hypoxia during sleep (IH), as occurs in sleep disordered breathing (SDB), induces spatial learning deficits associated with regulation of transcription factors associated with learning and memory in the hippocampal CA1 region in rats. high fat refined carbohydrate diet (HF/RC) can induce similar deficits and associated changes in signaling pathways under normoxic conditions. Methods. Sprague-Dawley adult male rats were fed either with (HF/RC) or low fat/complex carbohydrate diet (LF/CC) starting at postnatal day 30 for 90 days, and were then exposed for 14 days during light phase (12 h/day) to either normoxia (RA) or IH (21% and 10% O-2 alternations every 90 s). Place-training reference memory task deficits were assessed in the Morris water maze. Total and ser-133 phosphorylated CREB were assessed in different brain regions by Western blotting and immunostaining in rats exposed to normoxia or IH and to LF/CC or HF/RC. Results. Substantial decreases in CREB phosphorylation occurred in CA1 but not in motor cortex following either IH, HF/RC, and HF/RC + IH. Place-training reference memory task deficits were observed in rats exposed to IH and to HF/RC, and to a much greater extent in rats exposed to HF/RC + IH. Conclusions. Nutritional factors alter recruitment of transcription factors, possibly via oxidative-related pathways, and modulate the vulnerability of the CA1 region of the hippocampus to the episodic hypoxia that characterizes SDB, thereby enhancing neurocognitive susceptibility in SDB patients. (c) 2006 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