4.7 Article

Histone modifications at gene promoter regions in rat hippocampus after acute and chronic electroconvulsive seizures

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 24, 期 24, 页码 5603-5610

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0589-04.2004

关键词

chromatin remodeling; histones; electroconvulsive seizure; gene regulation; hippocampus; depression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanism of action of electroconvulsive seizures (ECS), one of the most effective treatments of major depression, may involve the regulation of gene expression. Chromatin remodeling at gene promoter regions is increasingly recognized as a key control point of gene expression and may, therefore, partly mediate acute and chronic effects of ECS on gene activity. Here, we assayed how posttranslational modifications of histones, a major form of chromatin remodeling, are altered at several gene promoters in rat hippocampus at 30 min, 2 hr, and 24 hr after acute or repeated ECS. We performed chromatin immunoprecipitation assays to measure levels of histone H3 and H4 acetylation and phosphoacetylation at the promoters of the c-fos, BDNF, and CREB ( cAMP response element-binding protein) genes, the expression of which is altered by ECS. We found that, with few exceptions, levels of H4 acetylation correlated with mRNA levels for c-fos, BDNF, and CREB throughout the acute and chronic time course study, whereas acetylation and phosphoacetylation of H3 were detected more selectively. Our findings suggest that the chronic downregulation of c-fos transcription, observed in this study, may be achieved at the level of H4 acetylation, whereas chronic upregulation of BDNF transcription may be sustained via control of H3 acetylation, selectively at the BDNF P3 and P4 promoters. These data provide the first in vivo demonstration of the involvement of chromatin remodeling in ECS-induced regulation of gene expression in the brain and will help in understanding the mechanisms underlying the efficacy of ECS in the treatment of depression.

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

4.7
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