Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 547

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Role of oxidation in the neurotoxic effects of intrastriatal dopamine injections.

Open access
Hastings, T G, Lewis, D A, Zigmond, M J·1996·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

We have examined the biochemical and histological effects of high concentrations of dopamine (0.05-1.0 micromol) injected into the rat striatum. Twenty-four hours after such injections, the oxidation products of dopamine and dihydroxyphenylacetic acid were detected as both free and protein-bound cysteinyl dopamine and cysteinyl dihydroxyphenylacetic acid. Protein-bound cysteinyl catechols were increased 7- to 20-fold above control tissue levels. By 7 days postinjection, the protein-bound cysteinyl catechols were still detectable, although reduced in concentration, whereas the free forms could no longer be measured. Histological examination of striatum at 7 days revealed a central core of nonspecific damage including neuronal loss and gliosis. This core was surrounded by a region containing a marked reduction in tyrosine hydroxylase immunoreactivity but no apparent loss of serotonin or synaptophysin immunoreactivity. When dopamine was injected with an equimolar concentration of either ascorbic acid or glutathione, the formation of protein-bound cysteinyl catechols was greatly reduced. Moreover, the specific loss of tyrosine hydroxylase immunoreactivity associated with dopamine injections was no longer detectable, although the nonspecific changes in cytoarchitecture were still apparent. Thus, following its oxidation, dopamine in high concentrations binds to protein in the striatum, an event that is correlated with the specific loss of dopaminergic terminals. We suggest that the selective degeneration of dopamine neurons in Parkinson's disease may be caused by an imbalance between the oxidation of dopamine and the availability of antioxidant defenses.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.93.5.1956

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 547

Metadata

Authors
Hastings, T. G., Lewis, D. A., & Zigmond, M. J.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1996-03-05
Volume
93
Issue
5
Pages
1956-1961
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2074128319
Cited by
547
References
2
FWCI
14.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Role of oxidation in the neurotoxic effects of intrastriatal dopamine injections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.93.5.1956
The paper
Hastings, T. G., Lewis, D. A., & Zigmond, M. J. (1996). Role of oxidation in the neurotoxic effects of intrastriatal dopamine injections. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.5.1956

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.