4.5 Article

Differential regulation of behavioral, genomic and neuroendocrine responses by CRF infusions in rats

期刊

PHARMACOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY AND BEHAVIOR
卷 77, 期 3, 页码 447-455

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pbb.2003.12.010

关键词

anxiety; amygdala; stress; social interaction; corticosterone; c-fos

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies suggest that behavioral, genomic, and endocrine functions mediated by central corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF)-containing circuits may be differentially regulated. However, this hypothesis has never been tested directly by simultaneous assessment of distinct CRF-mediated responses within the same animal. The present study addressed this issue by concurrently examining the effects of central CRF infusions on anxiety responses, plasma corticosterone release, and c-fos mRNA induction within limbic brain circuits. Bilateral intracerebroventricular (icv) infusions of CRF (0.1 - 10 mug total) dose-dependently reduced exploratory behavior in a novel open field, increased circulating corticosterone (CORT) levels and augmented c-fos mRNA expression in the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) and the hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN). Plasma CORT levels increased significantly after 0.1 mug CRF, whereas behavioral and genomic responses required at least 1 mug CRF, suggesting that the distinct responses mediated by CRF are differentially regulated. Further characterization of intracerebroventricular CRF at 1 mug also demonstrated a disruption of social interaction behavior. The majority of behavioral effects and the elevated c-fos mRNA expression were attenuated by 10 mg/kg DMP696, a CRF1 antagonist. However, plasma CORT elevation required 30 mg/kg DMP696 for attenuation. Thus, our studies demonstrate a greater sensitivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis to intracerebroventricular CRF compared with the induction of innate fear-like responses and associated genomic changes. (C) 2004 Published by Elsevier 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