| Literature DB >> 34356159 |
Maryann N Krasko1,2, Jesse D Hoffmeister1,2, Nicole E Schaen-Heacock1,2, Jacob M Welsch1, Cynthia A Kelm-Nelson1, Michelle R Ciucci1,2,3.
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive, degenerative disorder that affects 10 million people worldwide. More than 90% of individuals with PD develop hypokinetic dysarthria, a motor speech disorder that impairs vocal communication and quality of life. Despite the prevalence of vocal deficits in this population, very little is known about the pathological mechanisms underlying this aspect of disease. As such, effective treatment options are limited. Rat models have provided unique insights into the disease-specific mechanisms of vocal deficits in PD. This review summarizes recent studies investigating vocal deficits in 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA), alpha-synuclein overexpression, DJ1-/-, and Pink1-/- rat models of PD. Model-specific changes to rat ultrasonic vocalization (USV), and the effects of exercise and pharmacologic interventions on USV production in these models are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: 6-OHDA; DJ1; Parkinson’s disease; Pink1; USV; alpha-synuclein; exercise; pathology; pharmacology; rat; ultrasonic vocalization
Year: 2021 PMID: 34356159 PMCID: PMC8303338 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11070925
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Figure 1Manuscript overview.
Figure 2Summary of model-specific USV, intervention, and neural findings in male rats. Ach = acetylcholine, AMB = nucleus ambiguus, α-syn = alpha-synuclein, DA = dopamine, ETC = electron transport chain, Glu = glutamate, LB = Lewy bodies, LC = locus coeruleus, L-Dopa = levodopa, MFB = medial forebrain bundle, PAG = periaqueductal gray, SNpc = substantia nigra pars compacta, Th-ir = tyrosine hydroxylase immunoreactivity, 5-HT = serotonin, ↓ = decrease, ↑ = increase. Underlined text notes category.
Summary of main effects of dopamine condition and call type on USV production.
| Publication | Sex | Dopamine Conditions (Independent Variable) | Call Type | USV | Effect | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ciucci et al., 2007 | M | 6-OHDA, Haloperidol, Control | n.a. | bandwidth | main effect of DA condition | 6-OHDA bandwidth ↓ |
| number of calls | n.s. | |||||
| Ciucci et al., 2008 | M | 6-OHDA, Haloperidol, Control | n.a. | peak amplitude | significant | 6-OHDA peak amplitude ↓ |
| Ciucci et al., 2009 | M | 6-OHDA, Haloperidol, Control | Simple, FM | percent simple calls | significant | Percent of simple |
| percent FM calls | significant | Percent FM calls > harmonic | ||||
| percent call type | significant | Simple was most frequent | ||||
| FM was most frequent in haloperidol and controls | ||||||
| total number of calls | n.s. | |||||
| duration | n.s. | |||||
| bandwidth | main effect of DA condition | 6-OHDA bandwidth ↓ | ||||
| maximum frequency | main effect of call type | Maximum frequency in | ||||
| maximum intensity | main effect of DA condition | 6-OHDA intensity ↓ | ||||
| main effect of call type | Maximum intensity in |
DA = dopamine, FM = frequency modulated, M = male, n.a. = not applicable, n.s. = not significant, USV = ultrasonic vocalization, ↓ = decrease.
Summary of effects of alpha-synuclein treatment on USV production.
| Publication | Sex | Treatment Group | USV (Dependent Variables) | Effect | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gombash et al., 2013 | M | rAAV2/5-α-syn, controls | call type | n.s. | |
| duration | n.s. | ||||
| bandwidth | n.s. | ||||
| intensity | significant | rAAV2/5-α-syn intensity ↓ | |||
| peak frequency | n.s. | ||||
| call rate | significant | rAAV2/5-α-syn call rate ↓ | |||
| latency to call | n.s. | ||||
| Paumier et al., 2015 | M | recombinant α-syn, α-syn PFF, controls | number of calls | treatment x call type | α-syn PFF number of simple calls ↓ |
| call rate | main effect of | α-syn PFF call rate ↓ | |||
| duration | main effect of | recombinant α-syn and α-syn PFF | |||
| peak frequency | main effect of | α-syn PFF peak frequency ↓ | |||
| intensity | n.s. | ||||
| latency to call | n.s. |
α-syn = alpha-synuclein, M = male, n.s. = not significant, USV = ultrasonic vocalization, ↓ = decrease.
Summary of interaction effects and main effects of genotype and age on USV production between DJ1-/- rats and WT controls.
| Publication | Sex | Genotypes | Ages (mo) | USV | Effect | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yang et al., 2018 | M | 2, 4, 6, 8 | percent | main effect of genotype | ||
| main effect of age | Percent complex calls at 6 and 8 mo > 2 mo; | |||||
| Percent complex calls at 6 and 8 mo > 4 mo | ||||||
| maximum | main effect of genotype | |||||
| main effect of age | Maximum duration at 4 mo > 2 mo | |||||
| maximum bandwidth | main effect of age | Maximum bandwidth at 4 mo > 2 mo | ||||
| maximum | main effect of age | Maximum intensity at 4, 6, and 8 mo > 2 mo | ||||
| maximum peak | n.s. | |||||
| average | main effect of genotype | |||||
| average | main effect of age | Average bandwidth at 4 mo > 2 mo | ||||
| average | genotype x age | At 8, | ||||
| average peak frequency | main effect of age | Average peak frequency at 8 mo < 2 mo |
M = male, mo = months, n.s. = not significant, USV = ultrasonic vocalization, WT = wildtype, ↓ = decrease, ↑ = increase.
Summary of interaction effects and main effects of genotype and age on USV production between Pink1-/- rats and WT controls.
| Publication | Sex | Genotypes | Ages (mo) | USV (Dependent Variables) | Effect | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grant et al., 2015 | M | 2, 4, 6, 8 | average intensity of FM calls | main effect of genotype | ||
| main effect of age | Average intensity at 4 mo > 2 mo | |||||
| average | genotype x age interaction | At 4 and 6 mo, | ||||
| average peak | genotype x age interaction | At 6 and 8 mo, | ||||
| At 6 and 8 mo, | ||||||
| average duration of FM calls | main effect of age | Average duration at 4, 6, and 8 mo > 2 mo | ||||
| percent complex calls | genotype x age interaction | All rats produced more complex calls over time; | ||||
| WT complex calls at 8 mo > 4 mo; | ||||||
| Johnson et al., 2020 | M | 10 | intensity | main effect of genotype | ||
| peak frequency | main effect of genotype | |||||
| average duration of FM calls | n.s. | |||||
| average | n.s. | |||||
| Marquis et al., 2020 | F | 2, 4, 6, 8 | number of calls | genotype x age interaction | At 2 mo, | |
| percent complex calls | main effect of age | All rats produced ↓ percent complex calls over time; | ||||
| Significant differences between 2-4, 2-8, 4-6, 4-8, and 6-8 mo | ||||||
| duration of | main effect of age | Duration of simple calls significantly different at 4 mo vs. 2, 6, 8 mo | ||||
| duration of | main effect of age | Duration of FM calls at 8 mo > 2 and 4 mo | ||||
| bandwidth of simple calls | main effect of age | Bandwidth of simple calls at 4 mo < 2, 6, 8 mo | ||||
| average intensity of FM calls | main effect of genotype |
F = female, FM = frequency modulated, M = male, mo = months, n.s. = not significant, USV = ultrasonic vocalization, WT = wildtype, ↓ = decrease, ↑ = increase.