帕金森病的皮质基质:个人旅程

G. Arbuthnott, M. G. Muñoz
{"title":"帕金森病的皮质基质:个人旅程","authors":"G. Arbuthnott, M. G. Muñoz","doi":"10.15344/2456-8007/2018/130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We first started thinking that cortex must be important in Parkinson’s disease when Alan R. Crossman did some experiments in rats, showing transient reductions in 6-hydroxydopamineinduced spontaneous turning behavior after cortical lesions [1]. The experiments were elegant, but the lesions were large and did not block the turning, suggesting a kind of competition rather than a causal influence of cortex in the turning behavior. Similar conclusions plagued the many attempts to decide which of the brainstem pathways were the substrate of the turning behavior that followed the destruction of dopamine cells unilaterally, for review see, Arbuthnott and Wright [2]. However, as we finished a study of the anatomy of the basal ganglia [3] we concluded that the final output from the striatum came through the output nuclei of the basal ganglia: the globus pallidus pars interna (entopeduncular nucleus in rodents) and the substantia nigra pars reticulata, to a small nucleus in the ventral thalamus (ventromedial -VMin the rat). Tracing the output from that nucleus brought us back to layer 1 of the cortex, close to where the search started in layer V [3]. This result had the basal ganglia appearing to be a loop ‘linking’ layer 5 to the superficial level of the cortex. Not a very likely scenario, nevertheless it did prepare us to look for an involvement of cortex in the consequences of dopamine destruction. Furthermore, the evidence was already there, the striatal spiny projection neurons (SPNs) that carried the first stage of the basal ganglia output, have cortical synapses on the spines [4]. When we studied the electron microscopic (EM) anatomy of the striatum without dopamine, there were obvious differences in those SPN spines [5-7]. There were fewer of them: we counted them stereologically in serial EM sections and found statistically fewer spines when the dopamine had been removed. As the theory about the differences in the two output pathways from the striatum developed, we started a long series of experiments where we identified the cells on which the spines were counted. By then, we were not alone and the final publication brought together the laboratories of Susan R. Sesack, Ariel Y. Deutch, Jim D. Surmeier, and ourselves [8]. It may be that we missed some dopamine D1 cells that were also denuded of spines [9], but the major effect was robust across all our studies. Therefore, damage to the dopamine input to the striatum, somehow spread to the cortical synapses on the spines of the SPNs. We did most of the work on rats but we also checked that the effect occurred in Parkinsonian patients. In fact, in post mortem human brain the effects were even more marked, with a 27% reduction in spine numbers compared with the 15% in the rats [10].","PeriodicalId":73437,"journal":{"name":"International journal of clinical research & trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cortical Substrate for Parkinsonism: A Personal Journey\",\"authors\":\"G. Arbuthnott, M. G. Muñoz\",\"doi\":\"10.15344/2456-8007/2018/130\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We first started thinking that cortex must be important in Parkinson’s disease when Alan R. Crossman did some experiments in rats, showing transient reductions in 6-hydroxydopamineinduced spontaneous turning behavior after cortical lesions [1]. The experiments were elegant, but the lesions were large and did not block the turning, suggesting a kind of competition rather than a causal influence of cortex in the turning behavior. Similar conclusions plagued the many attempts to decide which of the brainstem pathways were the substrate of the turning behavior that followed the destruction of dopamine cells unilaterally, for review see, Arbuthnott and Wright [2]. However, as we finished a study of the anatomy of the basal ganglia [3] we concluded that the final output from the striatum came through the output nuclei of the basal ganglia: the globus pallidus pars interna (entopeduncular nucleus in rodents) and the substantia nigra pars reticulata, to a small nucleus in the ventral thalamus (ventromedial -VMin the rat). Tracing the output from that nucleus brought us back to layer 1 of the cortex, close to where the search started in layer V [3]. This result had the basal ganglia appearing to be a loop ‘linking’ layer 5 to the superficial level of the cortex. Not a very likely scenario, nevertheless it did prepare us to look for an involvement of cortex in the consequences of dopamine destruction. Furthermore, the evidence was already there, the striatal spiny projection neurons (SPNs) that carried the first stage of the basal ganglia output, have cortical synapses on the spines [4]. When we studied the electron microscopic (EM) anatomy of the striatum without dopamine, there were obvious differences in those SPN spines [5-7]. There were fewer of them: we counted them stereologically in serial EM sections and found statistically fewer spines when the dopamine had been removed. As the theory about the differences in the two output pathways from the striatum developed, we started a long series of experiments where we identified the cells on which the spines were counted. By then, we were not alone and the final publication brought together the laboratories of Susan R. Sesack, Ariel Y. Deutch, Jim D. Surmeier, and ourselves [8]. It may be that we missed some dopamine D1 cells that were also denuded of spines [9], but the major effect was robust across all our studies. Therefore, damage to the dopamine input to the striatum, somehow spread to the cortical synapses on the spines of the SPNs. We did most of the work on rats but we also checked that the effect occurred in Parkinsonian patients. In fact, in post mortem human brain the effects were even more marked, with a 27% reduction in spine numbers compared with the 15% in the rats [10].\",\"PeriodicalId\":73437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of clinical research & trials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of clinical research & trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-8007/2018/130\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of clinical research & trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-8007/2018/130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当艾伦·r·克罗斯曼在老鼠身上做了一些实验时,我们第一次开始认为皮层在帕金森病中一定很重要,实验显示,在皮层损伤b[1]后,6-羟多巴胺诱导的自发转向行为会短暂减少。实验很优雅,但损伤很大,并没有阻止旋转,这表明一种竞争,而不是大脑皮层对旋转行为的因果影响。类似的结论困扰着许多试图确定哪条脑干通路是多巴胺细胞单方面破坏后转向行为的基础的尝试,详见Arbuthnott和Wright。然而,当我们完成对基底神经节的解剖研究时,我们得出结论,纹状体的最终输出是通过基底神经节的输出核:白球内部(啮齿动物的髓内核)和网状黑质,到丘脑腹侧的一个小核(大鼠的腹内侧核)。追踪核的输出将我们带回到皮层的第一层,接近V层[3]开始搜索的地方。这一结果显示,基底神经节似乎是一个连接第5层和皮层表层的环路。这不是一个很可能的场景,但它确实让我们准备好去寻找多巴胺破坏的后果中皮层的参与。此外,已经有证据表明,纹状体棘突投射神经元(SPNs)携带基底神经节的第一阶段输出,在棘突上有皮质突触。当我们对不含多巴胺的纹状体进行电镜解剖时,这些SPN棘有明显的差异[5-7]。它们的数量更少了:我们在连续的EM切片中对它们进行了立体计数,并在统计上发现,当多巴胺被移除时,脊椎数量减少了。随着纹状体两种输出路径的差异理论的发展,我们开始了一系列的实验,在这些实验中,我们确定了计算棘的细胞。到那时,我们并不孤单,最终的出版物汇集了苏珊·r·塞萨克、阿里尔·y·多伊奇、吉姆·d·萨梅尔和我们自己的实验室。这可能是我们遗漏了一些多巴胺D1细胞,这些细胞也被剥夺了脊髓[9],但在我们所有的研究中,主要的影响是强大的。因此,对纹状体多巴胺输入的损害,以某种方式扩散到spn棘上的皮质突触。我们在老鼠身上做了大部分的研究,但我们也检查了这种效果是否发生在帕金森病患者身上。事实上,在死后的人类大脑中,这种影响更为明显,脊椎数量减少了27%,而大鼠的脊椎数量减少了15%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Cortical Substrate for Parkinsonism: A Personal Journey
We first started thinking that cortex must be important in Parkinson’s disease when Alan R. Crossman did some experiments in rats, showing transient reductions in 6-hydroxydopamineinduced spontaneous turning behavior after cortical lesions [1]. The experiments were elegant, but the lesions were large and did not block the turning, suggesting a kind of competition rather than a causal influence of cortex in the turning behavior. Similar conclusions plagued the many attempts to decide which of the brainstem pathways were the substrate of the turning behavior that followed the destruction of dopamine cells unilaterally, for review see, Arbuthnott and Wright [2]. However, as we finished a study of the anatomy of the basal ganglia [3] we concluded that the final output from the striatum came through the output nuclei of the basal ganglia: the globus pallidus pars interna (entopeduncular nucleus in rodents) and the substantia nigra pars reticulata, to a small nucleus in the ventral thalamus (ventromedial -VMin the rat). Tracing the output from that nucleus brought us back to layer 1 of the cortex, close to where the search started in layer V [3]. This result had the basal ganglia appearing to be a loop ‘linking’ layer 5 to the superficial level of the cortex. Not a very likely scenario, nevertheless it did prepare us to look for an involvement of cortex in the consequences of dopamine destruction. Furthermore, the evidence was already there, the striatal spiny projection neurons (SPNs) that carried the first stage of the basal ganglia output, have cortical synapses on the spines [4]. When we studied the electron microscopic (EM) anatomy of the striatum without dopamine, there were obvious differences in those SPN spines [5-7]. There were fewer of them: we counted them stereologically in serial EM sections and found statistically fewer spines when the dopamine had been removed. As the theory about the differences in the two output pathways from the striatum developed, we started a long series of experiments where we identified the cells on which the spines were counted. By then, we were not alone and the final publication brought together the laboratories of Susan R. Sesack, Ariel Y. Deutch, Jim D. Surmeier, and ourselves [8]. It may be that we missed some dopamine D1 cells that were also denuded of spines [9], but the major effect was robust across all our studies. Therefore, damage to the dopamine input to the striatum, somehow spread to the cortical synapses on the spines of the SPNs. We did most of the work on rats but we also checked that the effect occurred in Parkinsonian patients. In fact, in post mortem human brain the effects were even more marked, with a 27% reduction in spine numbers compared with the 15% in the rats [10].
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信