4.5 Article

Optimization of chronic stress paradigms using anxiety- and depression-like behavioral parameters

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH
卷 83, 期 3, 页码 497-507

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jnr.20754

关键词

chronic restraint stress; anxiety; depression; microarray

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic stress is a risk factor for psychiatric illnesses, such as anxiety and depression disorders. To understand the underlying mechanism regarding how chronic stress triggers such psychiatric dysfunctions, restraint-based chronic stress models have been attempted in the past. However, total durations of repeated restraint stress and the evaluation time points used after the last restraint application vary from experiment to experiment. One reason for these methodological heterogeneities is related to considerable ambiguity concerning the definition of chronic stress, particularly in animal models. In the present study, we used behavioral traits, anxiety and depression, as stress-assessment parameters that meet operationally useful requirements for the definition of the chronic stress state. We demonstrate that restraint treatment for 2 or 8 hr daily for 14 days is enough to produce anxiety- and depression-like behaviors, whereas a 2 hr-10 days restraint was marginally effective. cDNA microarray analysis identified 34 genes in the hippocampus and 72 genes in the amygdala with expression levels that were up- or down-regulated by > 2.0-fold. Among the wide range of genes identified in this analysis, genes required for energy metabolism, signal transduction, transcription, synaptic plasticity, and remodeling of the brain architecture were notable. Our results suggest that the psychiatric criteria of anxiety and depression can be used as chronic stress-assessment parameters and that a restraint stress paradigm consisting of restraint treatment for 2 or 8 hr daily for 14 days could be used as a prototype paradigm for chronic stress studies. (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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