4.5 Article

Different protocols of physical exercise produce different effects on synaptic and structural proteins in motor areas of the rat brain

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 1456, Issue -, Pages 36-48

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.03.059

Keywords

Treadmill exercise; Acrobatic exercise; Synaptic plasticity; Structural plasticity; Striatum; Cerebellum; Motor cortex

Categories

Funding

  1. FAPESP
  2. CNPq

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The plastic brain responses generated by the training with acrobatic exercise (AE) and with treadmill exercise (TE) may be different. We evaluated the protein expression of synapsin I (SYS), synaptophysin (SYP), microtubule-associated protein 2 (MAP2) and neurofilaments (NF) by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting in the motor cortex, striatum and cerebellum of rats subjected to TE and AE. Young adult male Wistar rats were divided into 3 groups: sedentary (Sed) (n=15), TE (n=20) and AE (n=20). The rats were trained 3 days/week for 4 weeks on a treadmill at 0.6 km/h, 40 min/day (TE), or moved through a circuit of obstacles 5 times/day (AE). The rats from the TE group exhibited a significant increase of SYS and SYP in the motor cortex, of NF68, SYS and SYP in the striatum, and of MAP2, NF and SYS in the cerebellum, whereas NF was decreased in the motor cortex and the molecular layer of the cerebellar cortex. On the other hand, the rats from the AE group showed a significant increase of MAP2 and SYP in the motor cortex, of all four proteins in the striatum, and of SYS in the cerebellum. In conclusion, AE induced changes in the expression of synaptic and structural proteins mainly in the motor cortex and striatum, which may underlie part of the learning of complex motor tasks. TE, on the other hand, promoted more robust changes of structural proteins in all three regions, especially in the cerebellum, which is involved in learned and automatic tasks. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available