4.7 Article

The neuroprotective effects of the seeds of Cassia obtusifolia on transient cerebral global ischemia in mice

期刊

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 47, 期 7, 页码 1473-1479

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2009.03.028

关键词

Global ischemia; Glia; iNOS; COX-2; BDNF; pCREB

资金

  1. Kyung Hee University Graduate School, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [과06A2601] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to determine the mechanism underlying the neuroprotective effects of the ethanolic extract of the seeds of Cassia obtusifolia (COE) (10 or 50 mg/kg/day, p.o) on transient cerebral global ischemia induced by bilateral common carotid artery occlusion (2VO) in mice. Immunohistochernical and western blot studies showed that levels of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in the hippocampal CA1 region at 1 day post-2VO were attenuated by COE (50 mg/kg/day, p.o), which was administered immediately after 2VO. Furthermore, OX-42 - and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)-positive cell numbers at 4 days post-2VO were markedly attenuated by COE (50 mg/kg/day, p.o) treatment for 4 days in CA1. Viable neurons detected by Nissl at 7 days post-2VO were increased by administering COE (50 mg/kg/day, p.o) for 7 days. In addition, COE increased the expressions of phosphorylated cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in CA1 in naive-control within I and 6 h, respectively, and these expressions were also profoundly increased in 2VO-treated mice by COE at immediately post-2VO. These results suggest that the neuroprotective effects of COE are due to its anti-inflammatory effects and to its upregulation of BDNF expression and CREB phosphorylation. Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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