Prolactin neuroprotective action against excitotoxic insult in the hippocampus of male mice.

Prolactin (PRL) is known to exert neuroprotective effects against excitotoxic damage in the hippocampus of female rats, both in vitro and in vivo. It is still unknown whether this effect can be seen in the male hippocampus and intracellular signaling mediating such action. To assess this, adult male CD-1 mice were subjected to excitotoxic damage with kainic acid (KA; i.c.v.), after a) no manipulation (control group), b) treatment with saline, and c) treatment with PRL (8 µg of PRL/100 µl of saline s.c.). Treatments consisted of one daily injection of the mentioned dosage for seven consecutive days until the day of the excitotoxic lesion. Neurodegeneration (Fluoro-Jade C), neuronal survival (NeuN) and astrogliosis (GFAP) markers were identified with immunohistochemistry in the CA1, CA3 and CA4 areas of the dorsal hippocampus, as well as PRL-related protein levels by Western blot in the whole hippocampus 48 h after excitotoxicity. Anatomical measurements revealed a preferential protective effect of PRL against excitotoxic damage in the CA3 hippocampal subfield, with lower levels of cell death and neurodegeneration, compared to controls. In CA4, the results were not conclusive, and no damage was observed in CA1 after KA administration. PRL treatment provoked an upregulation of active Akt, a well-known cell survival pathway, after KA administration. PRL also caused downregulation of active MAPK, independently of the excitotoxic damage. The present results indicate a neuroprotective role for PRL preferentially located in the CA3 area of the hippocampus of male mice, possibly mediated by Akt-related survival mechanisms.

Fatherhood diminishes the hippocampal damaging action of excitotoxic lesioning in mice.

Parental experience imposes neuroplasticity in the hippocampus of females and males. In lactating rat dams, the hippocampus is protected against excitotoxic damage by kainic acid lesioning, although it is still unknown whether paternity can provide such protection to male rodents. To evaluate the protective effects of fatherhood against excitotoxic lesions, we paired male mice with females and co-housed them until the day of parturition (PPD0), when we randomly assigned them to two groups: (i) the pregnancy group (males housed individually overnight and injected i.c.v. with 100 ng per 1 µL of kainic acid or vehicle on PPD1) and (ii) the sire group (males housed with the dam and pups until PPD8, when injected i.c.v. after evaluation of parental behaviour). Individually housed virgin adult male mice formed the control group. Markers of neurodegeneration (NeuN, Fluoro-Jade C) and astrogliosis (glial fibrillary acidic protein) were evaluated in fixed cerebral tissue containing the dorsal CA1, CA3 and CA4 hippocampal subfields. The CA1 subfield did not suffer damage in any of the experimental groups. The sire group exhibited less neurodegeneration and astrogliosis in the CA3 and CA4 subfields compared to their respective controls, independently of the expression of parental behaviour. Western blot analysis was conducted for prolactin (PRL), PRL receptor and related intracellular pathways. Monomeric PRL was lower in the hippocampus of sires in the first week postpartum with a parallel rise of a 48-kDa dimerised isoform compared to virgin controls. The long isoform of PRL receptor did not change, and signal transducer and activator of transcription 5 (STAT5) was not detected in the hippocampus. However, a sustained rise in pAkt, a signalling molecule that participates in cell survival, was observed in the sire group. These results indicate that the hippocampus of sires housed with the dam and pups is less sensitive to neurotoxic injury, which might not be primarily regulated by PRL-STAT5-modulated mechanisms.

Glial cells as mediators of protective actions of prolactin (PRL) in the CNS.

Prolactin (PRL) is a hormone with multiple actions in the central nervous system (CNS) spanning from physiology to pathology. PRL exerts different actions through its receptors that can be found in both neurons and glial cells (astrocytes, microglia and oligodendrocytes) of the brain. Even though its effects during pregnancy and lactation, stress, anxiety, and depression are well studied, recent work on this hormone has brought to light a new role of PRL: that of a protective agent against brain damage and, consequently, against neurodegeneration. The mechanisms through which this protection takes place have not been fully elucidated; however, neurogenesis and anti-apoptosis are some of the plausible mechanisms that could mediate this effect. There is substantial information that implies the involvement of glial activation in this PRL effect, as shown in various models of brain damage. Taking into account glial cell dynamics and actions in various pathological conditions, combined with the neuroprotective effect of PRL, we consider of importance the revision of all the information about the interaction between these two cell types, as it will provide comprehensive knowledge about this new target of PRL against neuropathology.

Cannabidiol inhibits the reward-facilitating effect of morphine: involvement of 5-HT1A receptors in the dorsal raphe nucleus.

Cannabidiol is a non-psychotomimetic constituent of Cannabis sativa, which induces central effects in rodents. It has been shown that cannabidiol attenuates cue-induced reinstatement of heroin seeking. However, to the best of our knowledge, its effects on brain stimulation reward and the reward-facilitating effects of drugs of abuse have not yet been examined. Therefore, we investigated the effects of cannabidiol on brain reward function and on the reward-facilitating effect of morphine and cocaine using the intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS) paradigm. Rats were prepared with a stimulating electrode into the medial forebrain bundle (MFB), and a guide cannula into the dorsal raphe (microinjection experiments), and were trained to respond for electrical brain stimulation. A low dose of cannabidiol did not affect the reinforcing efficacy of brain stimulation, whereas higher doses significantly elevated the threshold frequency required for MFB ICSS. Both cocaine and morphine lowered ICSS thresholds. Cannabidiol inhibited the reward-facilitating effect of morphine, but not cocaine. This effect was reversed by pre-treatment with an intra-dorsal raphe injection of the selective 5-HT1A receptor antagonist WAY-100635. The present findings indicate that cannabidiol does not exhibit reinforcing properties in the ICSS paradigm at any of the doses tested, while it decreases the reward-facilitating effects of morphine. These effects were mediated by activation of 5-HT1A receptors in the dorsal raphe. Our results suggest that cannabidiol interferes with brain reward mechanisms responsible for the expression of the acute reinforcing properties of opioids, thus indicating that cannabidiol may be clinically useful in attenuating the rewarding effects of opioids.