4.7 Article

Loss of kv3.1 tonotopicity and alterations in cAMP response element-binding protein signaling in central auditory neurons of hearing impaired mice

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 24, 期 8, 页码 1936-1940

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4554-03.2004

关键词

auditory; kv3.1; MNTB; CREB; tonotopicity; presbyacusis

资金

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [R01 DC001919, DC-01919] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [NS42202, P01 NS042202] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The promoter for the kv3.1 potassium channel gene is regulated by a Ca2+-cAMP responsive element, which binds the transcription factor cAMP response element-binding protein (CREB). Kv3.1 is expressed in a tonotopic gradient within the medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB) of the auditory brainstem, where Kv3.1 levels are highest at the medial end, which corresponds to high auditory frequencies. We have compared the levels of Kv3.1, CREB, and the phosphorylated form of CREB (pCREB) in a mouse strain that maintains good hearing throughout life, CBA/J (CBA), with one that suffers early cochlear hair cell loss, C57BL/6 (BL/6). A gradient of Kv3.1 immunoreactivity in the MNTB was detected in both young ( 6 week) and older ( 8 month) CBA mice. Although no gradient of CREB was detected, pCREB-immunopositive cells were grouped together in distinct clusters along the tonotopic axis. The same pattern of Kv3.1, CREB, and pCREB localization was also found in young BL/6 mice at a time ( 6 weeks) when hearing is normal. In contrast, at 8 months, when hearing is impaired, the gradient of Kv3.1 was abolished. Moreover, in the older BL/6 mice there was a decrease in CREB expression along the tonotopic axis, and the pattern of pCREB labeling appeared random, with no discrete clusters of pCREB-positive cells along the tonotopic axis. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that ongoing activity in auditory brainstem neurons is necessary for the maintenance of Kv3.1 tonotopicity through the CREB pathway.

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