4.4 Article

BDNF-induced facilitation of afferent-evoked responses in lamina II neurons is reduced after neonatal spinal cord contusion injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 94, 期 3, 页码 1798-1804

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00179.2005

关键词

-

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS-16996, P01 NS-39420] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We previously reported that brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), a pronociceptive neurotransmitter, induces synaptic facilitation of excitatory postsynaptic current (EPSC) in lamina II neurons of neonatal rats up to P14 in a N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor-dependent manner. Here we used the patch-clamp technique to study synaptic and NMDA-evoked responses in transverse spinal slices in the lumbar enlargement as well as the ability of BDNF to modify these responses from 1 day to 6 wk after neonatal contusion. In older uninjured animals (>P14), BDNF continued to evoke synaptic facilitation although superfusion of NMDA (in TTX) induced inward current of significantly smaller amplitude than that observed in younger rats. After contusion injury, BDNF was unable to facilitate dorsal root-evoked EPSCs in lamina II neurons despite the finding that NMDA-evoked currents were only slightly smaller than those observed in age-matched uninjured animals. These findings suggest that although BDNF-induced facilitation of the AMPA/kainate receptor-mediated response to dorsal root stimulation is maintained in the mature dorsal horn from intact rats, BDNF may no longer elicit these pronociceptive actions after neonatal contusion injury. The lack of change in NMDA-evoked currents in contused cords suggests that diminished NMDA receptor function is not the major cause of the decline in BDNF action after contusion. It seems more likely that diminished trkB expression and enhanced expression of truncated trkB receptors in the contused cord play a significant role in determining the reduced effect of BDNF under these conditions.

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