CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 38

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MicroRNA-204-5p reduction in rat hippocampus contributes to stress-induced pathology via targeting RGS12 signaling pathway

Lan, Tian, Li, Ye, Fan, Cuiqin, Wang, Liyan, Wang, Wenjing, Chen, Shihong, Yu, Shu Yan·2021·Journal of Neuroinflammation
DOI 10.1186/s12974-021-02299-5PMC PMC8532383
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Neuroinflammation occupies a pivotal position in the pathogenesis of most nervous system diseases, including depression. However, the underlying molecular mechanisms of neuroinflammation associated with neuronal injury in depression remain largely uncharacterized. Therefore, identifying potential molecular mechanisms and therapeutic targets would serve to better understand the progression of this condition. Methods: Chronic unpredictable stress (CUS) was used to induce depression-like behaviors in rats. RNA-sequencing was used to detect the differentially expressed microRNAs. Stereotactic injection of AAV virus to overexpress or knockdown the miR-204-5p. The oxidative markers and inflammatory related proteins were verified by immunoblotting or immunofluorescence assay. The oxidative stress enzyme and products were verified using enzyme-linked assay kit. Electron microscopy analysis was used to observe the synapse and ultrastructural pathology. Finally, electrophysiological recording was used to analyze the synaptic transmission. Results: Here, we found that the expression of miR-204-5p within the hippocampal dentate gyrus (DG) region of rats was significantly down-regulated after chronic unpredicted stress (CUS), accompanied with the oxidative stress-induced neuronal damage within DG region of these rats. In contrast, overexpression of miR-204-5p within the DG region of CUS rats alleviated oxidative stress and neuroinflammation by directly targeting the regulator of G protein signaling 12 (RGS12), effects which were accompanied with amelioration of depressive-like behaviors in these CUS rats. In addition, down-regulation of miR-204-5p induced neuronal deterioration in DG regions and depressive-like behaviors in rats. Conclusion: Taken together, these results suggest that miR-204-5p plays a key role in regulating oxidative stress damage in CUS-induced pathological processes of depression. Such findings provide evidence of the involvement of miR-204-5p in mechanisms underlying oxidative stress associated with depressive phenotype. Graphical Abstract:

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 · 10.1186/s12974-021-02299-5

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Oxidative damage as observed in the hippocampal DG region and vmPFC of CUS rats. A Behavioral responses of FST and SPT in control rats and CUS model rats (N = 50 per group). B Activity of antioxidant enzymes SOD and T-AOC. Contents of MDA and LDH were analyzed and levels were normalized to total protein content (N = 5–6 per group). C Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels NOX1 and NOX4 (N = 6 per group). D Q-PCR analysis of NOX1 and NOX4 mRNA levels of each group. Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH (N = 6 per group). E Representative images of DHE staining (red) within the DG area from each group of rats following ROS analysis (N = 6 per group). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Scale bar is 50 μm. F ROS relative intensity analysis after DHE staining in each group *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, vs Control group. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups
Fig. 1 Oxidative damage as observed in the hippocampal DG region and vmPFC of CUS rats. A Behavioral responses of FST and SPT in control rats and CUS model rats (N = 50 per group). B Activity of antioxidant enzymes SOD and T-AOC. Contents of MDA and LDH were analyzed and levels were normalized to total protein content (N = 5–6 per group). C Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels NOX1 and NOX4 (N = 6 per group). D Q-PCR analysis of NOX1 and NOX4 mRNA levels of each group. Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH (N = 6 per group). E Representative images of DHE staining (red) within the DG area from each group of rats following ROS analysis (N = 6 per group). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Scale bar is 50 μm. F ROS relative intensity analysis after DHE staining in each group *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, vs Control group. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groupsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 MiR-204-5p is reduced in the hippocampal DG region of CUS rats. A Heat map of differentially expressed miRNAs in hippocampal DG regions. B Relative expression levels of miR-204-5p, miR-1298, miR-143-3p and miR-34c-5p in the DG region (N = 7–8 per group). **P < 0.01, ****P < 0.0001, vs Control group. C Bar graphs represent magnitudes of significant correlations for miR-204-5p mediated signaling pathways as indicated by respective P-values (− log10 scaled). D Bioinformatical prediction of miR-204-5p target genes. E Predicted putative seed-matching sites between miR-204-5p and RGS12. F Luciferase reporter assay results as performed on 293Tcells to detect relative luciferase activities of WT and MUT RGS12 reporters (N = 3/group). **P < 0.01 vs WT + NC. &P < 0.05 vs WT + rno-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groups
Fig. 2 MiR-204-5p is reduced in the hippocampal DG region of CUS rats. A Heat map of differentially expressed miRNAs in hippocampal DG regions. B Relative expression levels of miR-204-5p, miR-1298, miR-143-3p and miR-34c-5p in the DG region (N = 7–8 per group). **P < 0.01, ****P < 0.0001, vs Control group. C Bar graphs represent magnitudes of significant correlations for miR-204-5p mediated signaling pathways as indicated by respective P-values (− log10 scaled). D Bioinformatical prediction of miR-204-5p target genes. E Predicted putative seed-matching sites between miR-204-5p and RGS12. F Luciferase reporter assay results as performed on 293Tcells to detect relative luciferase activities of WT and MUT RGS12 reporters (N = 3/group). **P < 0.01 vs WT + NC. &P < 0.05 vs WT + rno-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groupsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Effects of changes in miR-204-5p expression within the hippocampal DG region of normal and CUS rats. A Schematics of AAV vectors engineered to overexpress miR-204-5p, knock-down miR-204-5p and their corresponding controls. B Experimental paradigm for determining behavioral responses of rats infected with the virus. C Illustration of AAV viral infusion into the DG region. Scale bar is 1 mm. D The infection efficiency of AAV-miR-204-5p sponge and AAV-miR-204. Expression level of miR-204-5p in the DG region infected with AAV-204-5p or AAV-204-5p sponge (N = 10 per group). Behavioral responses in the (E) FST (N = 20 per group), (F) SPT (N = 20 per group) and (G) MWM of rats expressing various viral constructs within the DG region (N = 6 per group). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &P < 0.05, &&P < 0.01, &&&P < 0.001, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for D. Two-way ANOVA was used for E–F
Fig. 3 Effects of changes in miR-204-5p expression within the hippocampal DG region of normal and CUS rats. A Schematics of AAV vectors engineered to overexpress miR-204-5p, knock-down miR-204-5p and their corresponding controls. B Experimental paradigm for determining behavioral responses of rats infected with the virus. C Illustration of AAV viral infusion into the DG region. Scale bar is 1 mm. D The infection efficiency of AAV-miR-204-5p sponge and AAV-miR-204. Expression level of miR-204-5p in the DG region infected with AAV-204-5p or AAV-204-5p sponge (N = 10 per group). Behavioral responses in the (E) FST (N = 20 per group), (F) SPT (N = 20 per group) and (G) MWM of rats expressing various viral constructs within the DG region (N = 6 per group). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &P < 0.05, &&P < 0.01, &&&P < 0.001, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for D. Two-way ANOVA was used for E–FCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 MiR-204-5p knock-down within the hippocampal DG region results in neuronal inflammation and oxidative stress in normal rats. A Representative confocal microscopic images showing expressions of 4-HNE in the DG region after AAV-miR-204-5p sponge infusion (N = 6 per group). Scale bar is 50 μm. B Representative images of Mito-Sox staining (red). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Neurons (green) are stained with Anti-NeuN. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group). C Representative images of 8-oHdG staining (red). Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) D Immunofluorescent staining of Iba1 positive microglial cells within the DG region. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) E Western bolt assays of protein expression levels of NOX1 and NOX4 within the DG region (N = 6 per group). F Q-PCR assays of mRNA expression levels of IL1β, TNF-α and IFN-γ within the DG region. Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH (N = 6 per group). **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups
Fig. 4 MiR-204-5p knock-down within the hippocampal DG region results in neuronal inflammation and oxidative stress in normal rats. A Representative confocal microscopic images showing expressions of 4-HNE in the DG region after AAV-miR-204-5p sponge infusion (N = 6 per group). Scale bar is 50 μm. B Representative images of Mito-Sox staining (red). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Neurons (green) are stained with Anti-NeuN. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group). C Representative images of 8-oHdG staining (red). Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) D Immunofluorescent staining of Iba1 positive microglial cells within the DG region. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) E Western bolt assays of protein expression levels of NOX1 and NOX4 within the DG region (N = 6 per group). F Q-PCR assays of mRNA expression levels of IL1β, TNF-α and IFN-γ within the DG region. Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH (N = 6 per group). **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groupsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 MiR-204-5p overexpression within the hippocampal DG region alleviates neuronal inflammation and oxidative stress in CUS rats. A Representative confocal microscopic images showing expressions of 4-HNE in the DG region after AAV-miR-204-5p infusion (N = 6 per group). Scale bar is 50 μm. B Representative images of Mito-Sox staining (red). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Neurons (green) are stained with Anti-NeuN. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) C Representative confocal microscopic images of immunostainings for 8-oHdG in the DG region. Scale bar = 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) D Immunofluorescent staining of Iba1 positive microglial cells within the DG region. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) E Western bolt assays of protein expression levels of NOX1 and NOX4 within the DG region (N = 6 per group). F Q-PCR showing mRNA levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH. N = 6 per group, ****P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groups
Fig. 5 MiR-204-5p overexpression within the hippocampal DG region alleviates neuronal inflammation and oxidative stress in CUS rats. A Representative confocal microscopic images showing expressions of 4-HNE in the DG region after AAV-miR-204-5p infusion (N = 6 per group). Scale bar is 50 μm. B Representative images of Mito-Sox staining (red). Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Neurons (green) are stained with Anti-NeuN. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) C Representative confocal microscopic images of immunostainings for 8-oHdG in the DG region. Scale bar = 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) D Immunofluorescent staining of Iba1 positive microglial cells within the DG region. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) E Western bolt assays of protein expression levels of NOX1 and NOX4 within the DG region (N = 6 per group). F Q-PCR showing mRNA levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, Band intensities were normalized to GAPDH. N = 6 per group, ****P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groupsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 MiR-204-5p inhibits the occurrence of oxidative stress within the hippocampal DG region via the RGS12/Nrf2-NF-κB pathway. A Representative images of RGS12 (red) and MAP2 (green) staining. Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) B, C Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels of RGS12, Nrf2, NQO1, HO-1 and NF-κB p65 in AAV-miR-204-5p sponge virus infected DGs (N = 6 per group). (D-E) Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels in AAV-miR-204-5p virus infected DGs (N = 6 per group). **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &&P < 0.01, &&&P < 0.001, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. Two-way ANOVA was used for Fig. 6A. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for C and E
Fig. 6 MiR-204-5p inhibits the occurrence of oxidative stress within the hippocampal DG region via the RGS12/Nrf2-NF-κB pathway. A Representative images of RGS12 (red) and MAP2 (green) staining. Nuclei (blue) are stained with DAPI. Scale bar is 50 μm. (N = 6 per group) B, C Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels of RGS12, Nrf2, NQO1, HO-1 and NF-κB p65 in AAV-miR-204-5p sponge virus infected DGs (N = 6 per group). (D-E) Representative western blot images showing relative protein levels in AAV-miR-204-5p virus infected DGs (N = 6 per group). **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &&P < 0.01, &&&P < 0.001, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. Two-way ANOVA was used for Fig. 6A. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test was used for C and ECC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 MiR-204-5p regulates synaptic plasticity of DG neurons in rats. A Representative traces of sEPSCs in DG neurons of rats infected with the virus. B Cumulative fraction plots of sEPSCs amplitudes and frequencies. C Cumulative fraction plots of mEPSCs amplitudes and frequencies. D Representative traces of mEPSCs in DG neurons of rats infected with the virus. N = 18 neurons from six rats in each group. E Representative electron micrographs and summary of data showing the number of synapsis. Arrows indicate neuronal synapses. Scale bar is 1 μm. (N = 6 per group). F Representative electron micrograph of DG neurons in rats from each group (N = 6 per group). Arrows indicate neuronal synapses. Scale bar is 0.2 μm. **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &&P < 0.01, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. Two-way ANOVA was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groups
Fig. 7 MiR-204-5p regulates synaptic plasticity of DG neurons in rats. A Representative traces of sEPSCs in DG neurons of rats infected with the virus. B Cumulative fraction plots of sEPSCs amplitudes and frequencies. C Cumulative fraction plots of mEPSCs amplitudes and frequencies. D Representative traces of mEPSCs in DG neurons of rats infected with the virus. N = 18 neurons from six rats in each group. E Representative electron micrographs and summary of data showing the number of synapsis. Arrows indicate neuronal synapses. Scale bar is 1 μm. (N = 6 per group). F Representative electron micrograph of DG neurons in rats from each group (N = 6 per group). Arrows indicate neuronal synapses. Scale bar is 0.2 μm. **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001, control + AAV-control vs control + AAV-miR-204-5p sponge; &&P < 0.01, &&&&P < 0.0001, CUS + AAV-control vs CUS + AAV-miR-204-5p. Data are presented as means ± SEMs. Student t-tests were employed for comparisons between the two groups. Two-way ANOVA was used for multiple comparisons involving > 2 groupsCC BY · PubMed Central

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

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?

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

Cites

Show all 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Papakostas GI, Ionescu DF. Towards new mechanisms: an update on therapeutics for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder. Mol Psychiatr. 2015;20(10):1142–50. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2015.92. · DOI
  2. Keller J, Gomez R, Williams G, Lembke A, Lazzeroni L, Murphy GM Jr, Schatzberg AF. HPA axis in major depression: cortisol, clinical symptomatology and genetic variation predict cognition. Mol Psychiatry. 2017;22(4):527–36. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2016.120. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Anisman H, Merali Z, Hayley S. Neurotransmitter, peptide and cytokine processes in relation to depressive disorder: comorbidity between depression and neurodegenerative disorders. Prog Neurobiol. 2008;85(1):1–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2008.01.004. · DOI
  4. Beurel E, Toups M, Nemeroff CB. The bidirectional relationship of depression and inflammation: double trouble. Neuron. 2020;107(2):234–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.06.002. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Cobley JN, Fiorello ML, Bailey DM. 13 Reasons why the brain is susceptible to oxidative stress. Redox Biol. 2018;15:490–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redox.2018.01.008. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Szebeni A, Szebeni K, DiPeri TP, Johnson LA, Stockmeier CA, Crawford JD, Chandley MJ, Hernandez LJ, Burgess KC, Brown RW, Ordway GA. Elevated DNA oxidation and DNA repair enzyme expression in brain white matter in major depressive disorder. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2017;20(5):363–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyw114. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Jimenez-Fernandez S, Gurpegui M, Diaz-Atienza F, Perez-Costillas L, Gerstenberg M, Correll CU. Oxidative stress and antioxidant parameters in patients with major depressive disorder compared to healthy controls before and after antidepressant treatment: results from a meta-analysis. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(12):1658–67. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.14r09179. · DOI
  8. Ambros V. The functions of animal microRNAs. Nature. 2004;431(7006):350–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02871. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Fabian MR, Sonenberg N. The mechanics of miRNA-mediated gene silencing: a look under the hood of miRISC. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2012;19(6):586–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.2296. · DOI
  10. Sun P, Liu DZ, Jickling GC, Sharp FR, Yin KJ. MicroRNA-based therapeutics in central nervous system injuries. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2018;38(7):1125–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X18773871. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Mouillet-Richard S, Baudry A, Launay JM, Kellermann O. MicroRNAs and depression. Neurobiol Dis. 2012;46(2):272–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2011.12.035. · DOI
  12. Eacker SM, Dawson TM, Dawson VL. The interplay of microRNA and neuronal activity in health and disease. Front Cell Neurosci. 2013;7:136. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2013.00136. · DOI
  13. Antoniuk S, Bijata M, Ponimaskin E, Wlodarczyk J. Chronic unpredictable mild stress for modeling depression in rodents: meta-analysis of model reliability. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019;99:101–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.12.002. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Mao QQ, Ip SP, Ko KM, Tsai SH, Che CT. Peony glycosides produce antidepressant-like action in mice exposed to chronic unpredictable mild stress: effects on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function and brain-derived neurotrophic factor. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2009;33(7):1211–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2009.07.002. · DOI
  15. Vlachos IS, Kostoulas N, Vergoulis T, Georgakilas G, Reczko M, Maragkakis M, Paraskevopoulou MD, Prionidis K, Dalamagas T, Hatzigeorgiou AG. DIANA miRPath v.2.0: investigating the combinatorial effect of microRNAs in pathways. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40(1):W498-504. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks494. · DOI
  16. Kanehisa M, Sato Y, Kawashima M, Furumichi M, Tanabe M. KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(D1):D457–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1070. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Bidinosti M, Ran I, Sanchez-Carbente MR, Martineau Y, Gingras AC, Gkogkas C, Raught B, Bramham CR, Sossin WS, Costa-Mattioli M, DesGroseillers L, Lacaille JC, Sonenberg N. Postnatal deamidation of 4E-BP2 in brain enhances its association with raptor and alters kinetics of excitatory synaptic transmission. Mol Cell. 2010;37(6):797–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.02.022. · DOI
  18. Patel M. Targeting oxidative stress in central nervous system disorders. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2016;37(9):768–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tips.2016.06.007. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Klein JA, Ackerman SL. Oxidative stress, cell cycle, and neurodegeneration. J Clin Invest. 2003;111(6):785–93. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI18182. · DOI
  20. Black CN, Bot M, Scheffer PG, Cuijpers P, Penninx BW. Is depression associated with increased oxidative stress? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015;51:164–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.09.025. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Boldrini M, Santiago AN, Hen R, Dwork AJ, Rosoklija GB, Tamir H, Arango V, John Mann J. Hippocampal granule neuron number and dentate gyrus volume in antidepressant-treated and untreated major depression. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38(6):1068–77. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2013.5. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Gulyaeva NV. Functional neurochemistry of the ventral and dorsal hippocampus: stress depression, dementia and remote hippocampal damage. Neurochem Res. 2019;44(6):1306–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11064-018-2662-0. · DOI
  23. Weisz HA, Kennedy D, Widen S, Spratt H, Sell SL, Bailey C, Sheffield-Moore M, DeWitt DS, Prough DS, Levin H, Robertson C, Hellmich HL. MicroRNA sequencing of rat hippocampus and human biofluids identifies acute, chronic, focal and diffuse traumatic brain injuries. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):3341. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60133-z. · DOI
  24. Strycharz J, Wroblewski A, Zieleniak A, Swiderska E, Matyjas T, Rucinska M, Pomorski L, Czarny P, Szemraj J, Drzewoski J, Sliwinska A. Visceral adipose tissue of prediabetic and diabetic females shares a set of similarly upregulated microRNAs functionally annotated to inflammation, oxidative stress and insulin signaling. Antioxidants (Basel). 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10010101. · DOI
  25. Civelek M, Hagopian R, Pan C, Che N, Yang WP, Kayne PS, Saleem NK, Cederberg H, Kuusisto J, Gargalovic PS, Kirchgessner TG, Laakso M, Lusis AJ. Genetic regulation of human adipose microRNA expression and its consequences for metabolic traits. Hum Mol Genet. 2013;22(15):3023–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddt159. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Houzelle A, Dahlmans D, Nascimento EBM, Schaart G, Jorgensen JA, Moonen-Kornips E, Kersten S, Wang X, Hoeks J. MicroRNA-204-5p modulates mitochondrial biogenesis in C2C12 myotubes and associates with oxidative capacity in humans. J Cell Physiol. 2020;235(12):9851–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.29797. · DOI
  27. Miller AH, Maletic V, Raison CL. Inflammation and its discontents: the role of cytokines in the pathophysiology of major depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;65(9):732–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.11.029. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Neubig RR, Siderovski DP. Regulators of G-protein signalling as new central nervous system drug targets. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2002;1(3):187–97. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd747. · DOI
  29. Hollinger S, Hepler JR. Cellular regulation of RGS proteins: modulators and integrators of G protein signaling. Pharmacol Rev. 2002;54(3):527–59. https://doi.org/10.1124/pr.54.3.527. · DOI
  30. Squires KE, Montanez-Miranda C, Pandya RR, Torres MP, Hepler JR. Genetic analysis of rare human variants of regulators of G protein signaling proteins and their role in human physiology and disease. Pharmacol Rev. 2018;70(3):446–74. https://doi.org/10.1124/pr.117.015354. · DOI
  31. Talbot JN, Jutkiewicz EM, Graves SM, Clemans CF, Nicol MR, Mortensen RM, Huang X, Neubig RR, Traynor JR. RGS inhibition at G(alpha)i2 selectively potentiates 5-HT1A-mediated antidepressant effects. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(24):11086–91. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1000003107. · DOI
  32. Senese NB, Rasenick MM, Traynor JR. The role of G-proteins and G-protein regulating proteins in depressive disorders. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:1289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.01289. · DOI
  33. Snow BE, Hall RA, Krumins AM, Brothers GM, Bouchard D, Brothers CA, Chung S, Mangion J, Gilman AG, Lefkowitz RJ, Siderovski DP. GTPase activating specificity of RGS12 and binding specificity of an alternatively spliced PDZ (PSD-95/Dlg/ZO-1) domain. J Biol Chem. 1998;273(28):17749–55. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.28.17749. · DOI
  34. Ng AYH, Li Z, Jones MM, Yang S, Li C, Fu C, Tu C, Oursler MJ, Qu J, Yang S. Regulator of G protein signaling 12 enhances osteoclastogenesis by suppressing Nrf2-dependent antioxidant proteins to promote the generation of reactive oxygen species. Elife. 2019. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42951. · DOI
  35. Yuan G, Yang S, Ng A, Fu C, Oursler MJ, Xing L, Yang S. RGS12 is a novel critical NF-kappaB activator in inflammatory arthritis. iScience. 2020;23(6): 101172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2020.101172. · DOI
  36. Neves G, Cooke SF, Bliss TV. Synaptic plasticity, memory and the hippocampus: a neural network approach to causality. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9(1):65–75. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2303. · DOI
  37. Cheng A, Hou Y, Mattson MP. Mitochondria and neuroplasticity. ASN Neuro. 2010;2(5): e00045. https://doi.org/10.1042/AN20100019. · DOI
  38. Lopez-Aranda MF, Acevedo MJ, Carballo FJ, Gutierrez A, Khan ZU. Localization of the GoLoco motif carrier regulator of G-protein signalling 12 and 14 proteins in monkey and rat brain. Eur J Neurosci. 2006;23(11):2971–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04838.x. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Lan, T., Li, Y., Fan, C., Wang, L., Wang, W., Chen, S., & Yu, S. Y.
ORCID
Yu, Shu Yan
Venue
Journal of Neuroinflammation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-10-21
Volume
18
Issue
1
ISSN
1742-2094
DOI
10.1186/s12974-021-02299-5
PMC
PMC8532383
Cited by
38
References
5
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • national natural science foundation of china (NSFC81873796, NSFC82071513)
  • natural science foundation of shandong province (ZR2020ZD25)

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