Christoph Anacker1, Jan Scholz2, Kieran J O'Donnell3, Rylan Allemang-Grand2, Josie Diorio3, Rosemary C Bagot4, Eric J Nestler4, René Hen5, Jason P Lerch2, Michael J Meaney6. 1. Ludmer Centre for Neuroinformatics and Mental Health, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York; Columbia University, and Division of Integrative Neuroscience, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York. 2. Mouse Imaging Centre, Hospital for Sick Children, and Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Ludmer Centre for Neuroinformatics and Mental Health, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 4. Fishberg Department of Neuroscience Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Singapore; Friedman Brain Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; Singapore. 5. Department of Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York; Department of Neuroscience, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York; Department ofPharmacology, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York; Columbia University, and Division of Integrative Neuroscience, New York State Psychiatric Institute/Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc., New York, New York. 6. Ludmer Centre for Neuroinformatics and Mental Health, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, Singapore. Electronic address: michael.meaney@mcgill.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined the neurobiological mechanisms underlying stress susceptibility using structural magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging to determine neuroanatomic differences between stress-susceptible and resilient mice. We also examined synchronized anatomic differences between brain regions to gain insight into the plasticity of neural networks underlying stress susceptibility. METHODS: C57BL/6 mice underwent 10 days of social defeat stress and were subsequently tested for social avoidance. For magnetic resonance imaging, brains of stressed (susceptible, n = 11; resilient, n = 8) and control (n = 12) mice were imaged ex vivo at 56 µm resolution using a T2-weighted sequence. We tested for behavior-structure correlations by regressing social avoidance z-scores against local brain volume. For diffusion tensor imaging, brains were scanned with a diffusion-weighted fast spin echo sequence at 78 μm isotropic voxels. Structural covariance was assessed by correlating local volume between brain regions. RESULTS: Social avoidance correlated negatively with local volume of the cingulate cortex, nucleus accumbens, thalamus, raphe nuclei, and bed nucleus of the stria terminals. Social avoidance correlated positively with volume of the ventral tegmental area (VTA), habenula, periaqueductal gray, cerebellum, hypothalamus, and hippocampal CA3. Fractional anisotropy was increased in the hypothalamus and hippocampal CA3. We observed synchronized anatomic differences between the VTA and cingulate cortex, hippocampus and VTA, hippocampus and cingulate cortex, and hippocampus and hypothalamus. These correlations revealed different structural covariance between brain regions in susceptible and resilient mice. CONCLUSIONS: Stress-integrative brain regions shape the neural architecture underlying individual differences in susceptibility and resilience to chronic stress.
BACKGROUND: We examined the neurobiological mechanisms underlying stress susceptibility using structural magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging to determine neuroanatomic differences between stress-susceptible and resilient mice. We also examined synchronized anatomic differences between brain regions to gain insight into the plasticity of neural networks underlying stress susceptibility. METHODS: C57BL/6 mice underwent 10 days of social defeat stress and were subsequently tested for social avoidance. For magnetic resonance imaging, brains of stressed (susceptible, n = 11; resilient, n = 8) and control (n = 12) mice were imaged ex vivo at 56 µm resolution using a T2-weighted sequence. We tested for behavior-structure correlations by regressing social avoidance z-scores against local brain volume. For diffusion tensor imaging, brains were scanned with a diffusion-weighted fast spin echo sequence at 78 μm isotropic voxels. Structural covariance was assessed by correlating local volume between brain regions. RESULTS: Social avoidance correlated negatively with local volume of the cingulate cortex, nucleus accumbens, thalamus, raphe nuclei, and bed nucleus of the stria terminals. Social avoidance correlated positively with volume of the ventral tegmental area (VTA), habenula, periaqueductal gray, cerebellum, hypothalamus, and hippocampal CA3. Fractional anisotropy was increased in the hypothalamus and hippocampal CA3. We observed synchronized anatomic differences between the VTA and cingulate cortex, hippocampus and VTA, hippocampus and cingulate cortex, and hippocampus and hypothalamus. These correlations revealed different structural covariance between brain regions in susceptible and resilient mice. CONCLUSIONS: Stress-integrative brain regions shape the neural architecture underlying individual differences in susceptibility and resilience to chronic stress.
Authors: Anthony C Vernon; Sridhar Natesan; William R Crum; Jonathan D Cooper; Michel Modo; Steven C R Williams; Shitij Kapur Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2012-01-15 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Marita Pruessner; Jens C Pruessner; Dirk H Hellhammer; G Bruce Pike; Sonia J Lupien Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2007-03-28 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Kay M Tye; Julie J Mirzabekov; Melissa R Warden; Emily A Ferenczi; Hsing-Chen Tsai; Joel Finkelstein; Sung-Yon Kim; Avishek Adhikari; Kimberly R Thompson; Aaron S Andalman; Lisa A Gunaydin; Ilana B Witten; Karl Deisseroth Journal: Nature Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Anthony C Vernon; William R Crum; Jason P Lerch; Winfred Chege; Sridhar Natesan; Michel Modo; Jonathan D Cooper; Steven C R Williams; Shitij Kapur Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2013-10-19 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Ricardo Magalhães; Ashley Novais; David A Barrière; Paulo Marques; Fernanda Marques; João C Sousa; João J Cerqueira; Arnaud Cachia; Therese M Jay; Michel Bottlaender; Nuno Sousa; Sébastien Mériaux; Fawzi Boumezbeur Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2019-02-25 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Maria Ironside; Roee Admon; Stephanie A Maddox; Malavika Mehta; Samuel Douglas; David P Olson; Diego A Pizzagalli Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: M J Caruso; D E Reiss; J I Caulfield; J L Thomas; A N Baker; S A Cavigelli; H M Kamens Journal: Brain Res Bull Date: 2017-08-09 Impact factor: 4.077