4.5 Article

Glucocorticoids exacerbate insult-induced declines in metabolism in selectively vulnerable hippocampal cell fields

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 870, 期 1-2, 页码 109-117

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-8993(00)02407-0

关键词

glucocorticoids; stress; hippocampus; selective vulnerability; metabolism

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH53814] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucocorticoids (GCs), the adrenal steroids released during stress, can compromise the ability of hippocampal neurons to survive necrotic neurological insults. This GC-induced endangerment has energetic facets, in that it can be attenuated with energy supple mentation. In the present report, we studied the effects of GCs on the metabolic response of specific hippocampal cell fields to necrotic insults. We used silicon microphysiometry, which allows indirect measurement of metabolism in real time in tissue explants. Aglycemia caused a significant decline in metabolism in dentate gyms explants, but not in CA1 or CA3 explants. When coupled with our prior report of cyanide disrupting metabolism only in CA1 explants, and the glutamatergic excitotoxin kainic acid disrupting metabolism only in CA3 explants, this demonstrates that microphysiometry can detect the selective regional vulnerability that characterizes the hippocampal response to these necrotic insults. We then examined the effects of GCs on the response to these insults, monitoring explants taken from rats that were adrenalectomized, intact, or treated with corticosterone (the GC of rats) that produced circulating levels equivalent to those of major stressors. Increased exposure to GCs worsened the decline in metabolism in dentate gyrus explants induced by hypoglycemia, and in CA1 explants induced by cyanide (after eliminating the effects of glial release of lactate for the support of neuronal metabolism). Thus. GCs worsen the metabolic consequences of necrotic insults in hippocampal explants. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science 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

4.5
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