Neuroprotective effect of ketamine/xylazine on two rat models of Parkinson's disease

There is a great concern in the literature for the development of neuroprotectant drugs to treat Parkinson's disease. Since anesthetic drugs have hyperpolarizing properties, they can possibly act as neuroprotectants. In the present study, we have investigated the neuroprotective effect of a mixture of ketamine (85 mg/kg) and xylazine (3 mg/kg) (K/X) on the 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) or 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) rat models of Parkinson's disease. The bilateral infusion of MPTP (100 æg/side) or 6-OHDA (10 æg/side) into the substantia nigra pars compacta of adult male Wistar rats under thiopental anesthesia caused a modest (~67 percent) or severe (~91 percent) loss of tyrosine hydroxylase-immunostained cells, respectively. On the other hand, an apparent neuroprotective effect was observed when the rats were anesthetized with K/X, infused 5 min before surgery. This treatment caused loss of only 33 percent of the nigral tyrosine hydroxylase-immunostained cells due to the MPTP infusion and 51 percent due to the 6-OHDA infusion. This neuroprotective effect of K/X was also suggested by a less severe reduction of striatal dopamine levels in animals treated with these neurotoxins. In the working memory version of the Morris water maze task, both MPTP- and 6-OHDA-lesioned animals spent nearly 10 s longer to find the hidden platform in the groups where the neurotoxins were infused under thiopental anesthesia, compared to control animals. This amnestic effect was not observed in rats infused with the neurotoxins under K/X anesthesia. These results suggest that drugs with a pharmacological profile similar to that of K/X may be useful to delay the progression of Parkinson's disease.

The brain decade in debate: III. Neurobiology of emotion

This article is a transcription of an electronic symposium in which active researchers were invited by the Brazilian Society of Neuroscience and Behavior (SBNeC) to discuss the advances of the last decade in the neurobiology of emotion. Four basic questions were debated: 1) What are the most critical issues/questions in the neurobiology of emotion? 2) What do we know for certain about brain processes involved in emotion and what is controversial? 3) What kinds of research are needed to resolve these controversial issues? 4) What is the relationship between learning, memory and emotion? The focus was on the existence of different neural systems for different emotions and the nature of the neural coding for the emotional states. Is emotion the result of the interaction of different brain regions such as the amygdala, the nucleus accumbens, or the periaqueductal gray matter or is it an emergent property of the whole brain neural network? The relationship between unlearned and learned emotions was also discussed. Are the circuits of the former the underpinnings of the latter? It was pointed out that much of what we know about emotions refers to aversively motivated behaviors, like fear and anxiety. Appetitive emotions should attract much interest in the future. The learning and memory relationship with emotions was also discussed in terms of conditioned and unconditioned stimuli, innate and learned fear, contextual cues inducing emotional states, implicit memory and the property of using this term for animal memories. In a general way it could be said that learning modifies the neural circuits through which emotional responses are expressed

The brain decade in debate: II. Panic or anxiety? From animal models to a neurobiological basis

This article is a transcription of an electronic symposium sponsored by the Brazilian Society of Neuroscience and Behavior (SBNeC). Invited researchers from the European Union, North America and Brazil discussed two issues on anxiety, namely whether panic is a very intense anxiety or something else, and what aspects of clinical anxiety are reproduced by animal models. Concerning the first issue, most participants agreed that generalized anxiety and panic disorder are different on the basis of clinical manifestations, drug response and animal models. Also, underlying brain structures, neurotransmitter modulation and hormonal changes seem to involve important differences. It is also common knowledge that existing animal models generate different types of fear/anxiety. A challenge for future research is to establish a good correlation between animal models and nosological classification

The brain decade in debate: I. Neurobiology of learning and memory

This article is a transcription of an electronic symposium in which some active researchers were invited by the Brazilian Society for Neuroscience and Behavior (SBNeC) to discuss the last decade's advances in neurobiology of learning and memory. The way different parts of the brain are recruited during the storage of different kinds of memory (e.g., short-term vs long-term memory, declarative vs procedural memory) and even the property of these divisions were discussed. It was pointed out that the brain does not really store memories, but stores traces of information that are later used to create memories, not always expressing a completely veridical picture of the past experienced reality. To perform this process different parts of the brain act as important nodes of the neural network that encode, store and retrieve the information that will be used to create memories. Some of the brain regions are recognizably active during the activation of short-term working memory (e.g., prefrontal cortex), or the storage of information retrieved as long-term explicit memories (e.g., hippocampus and related cortical areas) or the modulation of the storage of memories related to emotional events (e.g., amygdala). This does not mean that there is a separate neural structure completely supporting the storage of each kind of memory but means that these memories critically depend on the functioning of these neural structures. The current view is that there is no sense in talking about hippocampus-based or amygdala-based memory since this implies that there is a one-to-one correspondence. The present question to be solved is how systems interact in memory. The pertinence of attributing a critical role to cellular processes like synaptic tagging and protein kinase A activation to explain the memory storage processes at the cellular level was also discussed