4.1 Article

Development of repetitive behavior in a mouse model: Roles of indirect and striosomal basal ganglia pathways

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2011.02.004

关键词

Autism; Stereotypy; Subthalamic nucleus; Neurodevelopmental disorders; Deer mice; Animal models

资金

  1. NIH [MH080055]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Restricted repetitive behaviors (stereotypy, compulsions, rituals) are diagnostic for autism spectrum disorder and common in related neurodevelopmental disorders. Despite their prevalence in clinical populations, underlying mechanisms associated with the development of these behaviors remain poorly understood. We examined the role of the indirect basal ganglia pathway in the development of stereotypy using deer mice. We measured neuronal metabolic activity in the subthalamic nucleus (STN) and other relevant brain regions using cytochrome oxidase (CO) histochemistry at three developmental time-points. Although no differences were observed in STN across development, significant differences were found when mice were grouped by developmental trajectory. At 6 weeks post-weaning, significantly lower CO activity in STN was found in those trajectory groups that developed high levels of repetitive behavior versus the trajectory group that did not, suggesting the development of stereotypy is associated with decreased indirect basal ganglia pathway activity. In addition, we tested the hypothesis that preferential activation of striatal striosomes relative to surrounding matrix would be associated with the development of stereotypy. No differences in the relative activation of these striatal compartments were observed across development or among trajectory groups. Our results point to dynamic changes in the indirect pathway associated with the development of repetitive behavior and extends our prior work linking reduced indirect pathway activation to stereotypy in adult deer mice. (C) 2011 ISDN. 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

4.1
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