4.5 Article

THE GLUK4 KAINATE RECEPTOR SUBUNIT REGULATES MEMORY, MOOD, AND EXCITOTOXIC NEURODEGENERATION

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE
卷 235, 期 -, 页码 215-225

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.01.029

关键词

kainate receptor; GluK4; excitotoxicity; memory; schizophrenia; bipolar disorder

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health Training Grant [GM 66699]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation [PBGEP3-125837]
  3. Schweizerischen Stiftung fur medizinisch-biologische Stipendien [PASMP3-136979]
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [PBGEP3-125837, PASMP3_136979] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Though the GluK4 kainate receptor subunit shows limited homology and a restricted expression pattern relative to other kainate receptor subunits, its ablation results in distinct behavioral and molecular phenotypes. GluK4 knockout mice demonstrated impairments in memory acquisition and recall in a Morris water maze test, suggesting a previously unreported role for kainate receptors in spatial memory. GluK4 knockout mice also showed marked hyperactivity and impaired pre-pulse inhibition, thereby mirroring two of the hallmark endophenotypes of patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Furthermore, we found that GluK4 is a key mediator of excitotoxic neurodegeneration: GluK4 knockout mice showed robust neuroprotection in the CA3 region of the hippocampus following intrahippocampal injection of kainate and widespread neuroprotection throughout the hippocampus following hypoxia-ischemia. Biochemical analysis of kainate- or sham-treated wild-type and GluK4 knockout hippocampal tissue suggests that GluK4 may act through the JNK pathway to regulate the molecular cascades that lead to excitotoxicity. Together, our findings suggest that GluK4 may be relevant to the understanding and treatment of human neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders. (c) 2013 IBRO. 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

4.5
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