4.7 Article

Auditory sensory gating in hippocampus and reticular thalamic neurons in anesthetized rats

期刊

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 53, 期 3, 页码 244-253

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3223(02)01463-4

关键词

schizophrenia; D-amphetamine; sensory gating model; haloperidol; electroencephalogram; single units

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Auditory gating is thought to reflect sensory information processing and is absent or diminished in schizophrenic patients. Although abnormal thalamic sensory processing has been proposed in schizophrenia, sensory gating of thalamic neurons has not been demonstrated experimentally. The aim of the present study was to establish whether auditory gating is present in the rat thalamus using a well-characterized animal model of auditory gating and schizophrenia. Methods: Hippocampal electroencephalogram and single-unit activity in the thalamic reticular nucleus (nRT) were recorded in anaesthetized rats. Evoked potentials in the hippocampus and neuronal activity in the nRT were monitored in response to bilateral auditory stimuli. The effects of the psychostimulant D-amphetamine and the antipsychotic haloperidol on auditory gating were evaluated. Results: Thalamic reticular nucleus neurons showed gated responses to paired-tone auditory stimuli, resembling hippocampal auditory gating. D-amphetamine disrupted auditory gating of nRT neurons and abolished their burst activity. D-amphetamine also disrupted hippocampal auditory gating and induced hippocampal theta activity. The amphetamine-induced gating deficit was reversed by haloperidol in both regions. Conclusions: Our findings provide the first experimental evidence for auditory gating of nRT neurons. We demonstrated that amphetamine disrupts sensory processing of nRT neurons, indicating similarities between hippocampal and thalamic sensory gating. These findings support the presumed connection between dopamine hyperfunction and abnormal thalamic filtering in schizophrenia. (C) 2003 Society of Biological Psychiatry.

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