4.6 Article

A 1H-NMR plasma metabonomic study of acute and chronic stress models of depression in rats

期刊

BEHAVIOURAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 241, 期 -, 页码 86-91

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2012.11.036

关键词

Metabonomics; Chronic unpredicted mild stress; Forced swim test; Nuclear magnetic resonance; Depression

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81102833, 81173366]
  2. Programs of International Science and Technology Cooperation of China [2011DFA32630]
  3. Programs of Science and Technology of Shanxi Province [2012021031-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To investigate and compare the metabonomic profiles of three stress-based models of depression, the effects of acute and chronic stress on the production of systemic endogenous metabolites were investigated. Such metabonomic analysis may provide researchers a new way of selecting appropriate animal models for the study of depression and antidepressants. Rats were subjected to one of three stress-based models: CUMS, FST-1d, or FST-14d. Endogenous metabolites excreted in plasma were analyzed using NMR in conjunction with multivariate and statistical techniques. The metabonomic study indicated that the concentration of different plasma metabolites could be used to differentiate among depression models: TMA, aspartic acid, glutamate, AcAc, NAc, alanine, lactate, Leu/Ile, lipids increased and proline, beta-HB, valine decreased in the CUMS model; TMA decreased in the FST-1d model; alpha-glucose, beta-glucose, beta-HB, valine and lipids increased in the FST-14d model. The results suggested that metabonomics is a potentially appropriate method for evaluating depression models. According to the metabonomics study, CUMS model was more suitable and sensitive than the acute FST-1d model and predictable FST-14d model. The CUMS model was more appropriate for investigating both the efficacy of antidepressants and their mechanisms of action, while the FST-14d model should only be used for evaluating the efficacy of treatment. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.6
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