A mild impairment in reversal learning in a bowl-digging substrate deterministic task but not other cognitive tests in the Dlg2+/- rat model of genetic risk for psychiatric disorder

Preclinical models for evaluating psychedelics in the treatment of major depressive disorder

Psychedelic drugs have seen a resurgence in interest as a next generation of psychiatric medicines with potential as rapid-acting antidepressants (RAADs). Despite promising early clinical trials, the mechanisms which underlie the effects of psychedelics are poorly understood. For example, key questions such as whether antidepressant and psychedelic effects involve related or independent mechanisms are unresolved. Preclinical studies in relevant animal models are key to understanding the pharmacology of psychedelics and translating these findings to explain efficacy and safety in patients. Understanding the mechanisms of action associated with the behavioural effects of psychedelic drugs can also support the identification of novel drug targets and more effective treatments. Here we review the behavioural approaches currently used to quantify the psychedelic and antidepressant effects of psychedelic drugs. We discuss conceptual and methodological issues, the importance of using clinically relevant doses and the need to consider possible sex differences in preclinical psychedelic studies.

Analysis of hippocampal synaptic function in a rodent model of early life stress

Background

Early life stress (ELS) is an important risk factor in the aetiology of depression. Developmental glucocorticoid exposure impacts multiple brain regions with the hippocampus being particularly vulnerable. Hippocampal mediated behaviours are dependent upon the ability of neurones to undergo long-term potentiation (LTP), an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) mediated process. In this study we investigated the effect of ELS upon hippocampal NMDAR function.

Methods

Hooded Long-Evans rat pups (n=82) were either undisturbed or maternally separated for 180 minutes per day (MS180) between post-natal day (PND) 1 and PND14. Model validation consisted of sucrose preference (n=18) and novelty supressed feeding (NSFT, n=34) tests alongside assessment of corticosterone (CORT) and paraventricular nucleus (PVN) cFos reactivity to stress and hippocampal neurogenesis (all n=18). AMPA/NMDA ratios (n=19), miniEPSC currents (n=19) and LTP (n=15) were assessed in whole-cell patch clamp experiments in CA1 pyramidal neurones.

Results

MS180 animals showed increased feeding latency in the NSFT alongside increased overall CORT in the restraint stress experiment and increased PVN cFos expression in males but no changes in neurogenesis or sucrose preference. MS180 was associated with a lower AMPA/NMDA ratio with no change in miniEPSC amplitude or area. There was no difference in short- or long-term potentiation between MS180 and control animals nor were there any changes during the induction protocol.

Conclusions

The MS180 model showed a behavioural phenotype consistent with previous work. MS180 animals showed increased NMDAR function with preliminary evidence suggesting that this was not concurrent with an increase in LTP.

Impaired reversal learning in the Dlg2+/- rat model of genetic risk for psychiatric disorder: Important questions regarding the neuro-behavioral mechanisms of reversal learning

In this issue, Griesius et al report that heterozygous Dlg2+/- rats showed a reversal learning impairment on a specific bowl-digging task, whereas other reversal tasks were unaffected. The study suggests that Dlg2 gene disruption, which has been linked to neuropsychiatric disorders, including schizophrenia, may cause relatively specific impairments in reversal learning, an important aspect of cognitive flexibility. The study draws attention to two important issues regarding the neuro-behavioral mechanisms of reversal learning, namely that hippocampal dysfunction, which is prominent in Dlg2+/- rats, may contribute to reversal learning impairments and that, depending on the task and previous experience, brain and behavioral mechanisms of reversal learning may differ.