4.5 Article

Repeated stress in young and old 5-HT2C receptor knockout mice

期刊

PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR
卷 79, 期 2, 页码 217-226

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0031-9384(03)00096-9

关键词

serotonin; chronic stress; 5-HT2C; habituation; metabolism; knockout

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH31359] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Serotonin (5-HT)(2C) receptor null mutant (knockout, KO) mice develop hyperphagia and midlife obesity. Based upon previous observations indicating altered responsiveness to stressful environmental conditions in these mice, we hypothesized that this KO mouse was hyperresponsive to repeated stress. To test this, we examined the effect of two intensities of repeated stress on food intake and body weight in 5-HT2C receptor KO and wild-type (WT) mice. The stressors involved daily cage change (including handling) for 3 days then daily restraint for 4 days. On the final day, mice were immediately decapitated after restraint to assess levels of plasma hormones. Two ages were used: young (12 weeks) and old (32-34 weeks). Basally, young KO were prehyperphagic and weighed the same as WT. In the old mice, KO were frankly hyperphagic and heavier than WT. In response to repeated cage change alone, the genotype-specific difference in food intake in the young group was enhanced, whereas in the old group it was diminished. This stressor did not significantly affect body weight change or caloric efficiency with respect to age or genotype. Repeated restraint had little effect on the young mice. However, in the old mice, KO had decreases in relative body weight and caloric efficiency compared with WT. In the old KO mice, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), corticosterone and insulin were increased compared with WT mice. Together, these findings indicate that 5-HT2C receptor KO mice are hyperresponsive to repeated stress and this effect is influenced by stressor intensity and initial metabolic state of the mouse. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

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