Cited by 118Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics

The direction of the acceleration and rotational forces associated with mild traumatic brain injury in rodents effect behavioural and molecular outcomes

Mychasiuk, Richelle, Hehar, Harleen, Candy, Sydeny, Ma, Irene, Esser, Michael J.·2016·Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Abstract

Background The translation of research to clinical application is only as good as the modelling platforms employed. This study sought to improve understanding of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), by examining the importance of acceleration and rotational force directions on behavioural and molecular outcomes. It is believed that many symptoms associated with concussive forms of mTBI are related to white matter and fibre tract damage. Given that rodents have significantly less white matter, could changes in acceleration/rotational force directionality alter outcomes?New method/comparison with existing methods Comparison of mTBIs with two distinct injury platforms, the lateral impact (LI) device, which produces horizontal acceleration/rotation; or the modified weight drop (WD) device, which produces sagittal or vertical acceleration/rotation. Male and female rats underwent a behavioural test battery followed by analysis of 5 TBI-associated biomarkers (BDNF, Eno2, GFAP, MAPT, TERT) from the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus.Results Acute behavioural impairments were similar for both injury models; animals exhibited increased time-to-wake, and deficits of balance and motor control. However, as the post-injury interval increased LI animals displayed deficits on tasks related to emotional functioning, whereas WD animals showed impairment in cognitive measures. Biomarker expression varied as a function of injury platform, sex, and brain region.Conclusion Just as with humans, the direction of the acceleration and rotational forces produced injuries in different networks and connections, resulting in altered functional deficits for rodents as well. These findings suggest that rodents are a valuable resource for the study of mTBI, when appropriately modelled.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.10.002

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Gene expression in males and females varied based on the direction of acceleration and rotational forces and number of head impacts.

    “Gene expression in males and females also varied based on the direction of acceleration and rotational forces and number of head impacts. 44,45”
  • Differences in gene expression following mild TBI in male and female rats were not associated with deficits in motor function.

    “Differences in gene expression following mild TBI in male and female rats were not associated with deficits in motor function. 44”
  • Sex-dependent changes in mRNA expression of growth factors and inflammatory markers were different between the prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus.

    “Sex-dependent changes in messenger ribonuleic acid (mRNA) expression of growth factors and inflammatory markers were different between the prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus. 44”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mychasiuk, R., Hehar, H., Candy, S., Ma, I., & Esser, M. J.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Mychasiuk, Richelle
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
257
Pages
168-178
ISSN
0165-0270 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1789349355
Cited by
118
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
FWCI
5.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Keywords
mild traumatic brain injury, weight-drop injury model, white matter injury, prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, neuron-specific enolase, glial fibrillary acidic protein, MAPT, telomerase reverse transcriptase, sex differences, behavioural deficits, emotional dysfunction, cognitive impairment
MeSH terms
Acceleration, Animals, Brain Injuries, Disease Models, Animal, Exploratory Behavior, Female, Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein, Hippocampus, Male, Motor Activity, Physical Stimulation, Random Allocation, Rotation, Sex Characteristics, Biomarkers, tau Proteins, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Prefrontal Cortex, Maze Learning, Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review