↓ Skip to main content

Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats (SHR) Are Resistant to a Reserpine-Induced Progressive Model of Parkinson’s Disease: Differences in Motor Behavior, Tyrosine Hydroxylase and α-Synuclein Expression

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats (SHR) Are Resistant to a Reserpine-Induced Progressive Model of Parkinson’s Disease: Differences in Motor Behavior, Tyrosine Hydroxylase and α-Synuclein Expression
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00078
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anderson H. F. F. Leão, Ywlliane S. R. Meurer, Anatildes F. da Silva, André M. Medeiros, Clarissa L. C. Campêlo, Vanessa C. Abílio, Rovena C. G. K. Engelberth, Jeferson S. Cavalcante, Geison S. Izídio, Alessandra M. Ribeiro, Regina H. Silva

Abstract

Reserpine is an irreversible inhibitor of vesicular monoamine transporter-2 (VMAT2) used to study Parkinson's disease (PD) and screening for antiparkinsonian treatments in rodents. Recently, the repeated treatment with a low-dose of reserpine was proposed as a progressive model of PD. Rats under this treatment show progressive catalepsy behavior, oral movements and spontaneous motor activity decrement. In parallel, compared to Wistar rats, spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) are resistant to acute reserpine-induced oral dyskinesia. We aimed to assess whether SHR would present differential susceptibility to repeated reserpine-induced deficits in the progressive model of PD. Male Wistar and SHR rats were administered 15 subcutaneously (s.c.) injections of reserpine (0.1 mg/kg) or vehicle, every other day and motor activity was assessed by the catalepsy, oral movements and open field tests. Only reserpine-treated Wistar rats presented increased latency to step down in the catalepsy test and impaired spontaneous activity in the open field. On the other hand, there was an increase in oral movements in both reserpine-treated strains, although with reduced magnitude and latency to instauration in SHR. After a 15-day withdrawn period, both strains recovered from motor impairment, but SHR animals expressed reduced latencies to reach control levels. Finally, we performed immunohistochemistry for tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) and α-synuclein (α-syn) 48 h after the last injection or 15 days after withdrawn. Reserpine-treated animals presented a reduction in TH and an increase in α-syn immunoreactivity in the substantia nigra and dorsal striatum (dSTR), which were both recovered after 15 days of withdraw. Furthermore, SHR rats were resistant to reserpine-induced TH decrement in the substantia nigra, and presented reduced immunoreactivity to α-syn in the dSTR relative to Wistar rats, irrespective of treatment. This effect was accompanied by increase of malondaldhyde (MDA) in the striatum of reserpine-treated Wistar rats, while SHR presented reduced MDA in both control and reserpine conditions relative to Wistar strain. In conclusion, the current results show that SHR are resilient to motor and neurochemical impairments induced by the repeated low-dose reserpine protocol. These findings indicate that the neurochemical, molecular and genetic differences in the SHR strain are potential relevant targets to the study of susceptibility to PD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 4 5%
Professor 4 5%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 29 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 19 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 31 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#2,842,077
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#1,213
of 4,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,509
of 308,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#43
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,832 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.