| Literature DB >> 35247972 |
Andrew J Lopuch1, Brian D Swinehart1, Eden L Widener1, Z Logan Holley1, Katherine M Bland1, Christopher J Handwerk1, Cooper A Brett1, Hollyn N Cook1, Anna R Kalinowski1, Hilda V Rodriguez1, M Irene Song1, George S Vidal2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is characterized by repetitive behaviors, deficits in communication, and overall impaired social interaction. Of all the integrin subunit mutations, mutations in integrin β3 (Itgb3) may be the most closely associated with ASD. Integrin β3 is required for normal structural plasticity of dendrites and synapses specifically in excitatory cortical and hippocampal circuitry. However, the behavioral consequences of Itgb3 function in the forebrain have not been assessed. We tested the hypothesis that behaviors that are typically abnormal in ASD-such as self-grooming and sociability behaviors-are disrupted with conditional Itgb3 loss of function in forebrain circuitry in male and female mice.Entities:
Keywords: Autism spectrum disorder; Forebrain; Grooming; Integrin; Integrin beta 3; Integrin β3; Itgb3; Self-grooming; Sociability
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35247972 PMCID: PMC8897866 DOI: 10.1186/s12868-022-00691-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurosci ISSN: 1471-2202 Impact factor: 3.288
Fig. 1Self-grooming times for WT, cHET and cKO mice in a home cage and novel environment. Self-grooming times are different in novel versus home environments overall (p = 0.0002, two-way ANOVA). WT and cHET mice exhibit differences in grooming behavior in a novel versus home environment (** p = 0.0049, * p = 0.0143, Šidák's multiple comparisons) while cKO mice do not (p = 0.6896, Šidák's multiple comparisons). Insets: Female (top) and male (bottom) grooming times in WT, cHET and cKO groups. See Table 1 and Additional file 2: Table S1 for means ± SEM
Self-grooming
| Factor | DFn | DFd | F | p | * Šidák's multiple comparisons | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Two-way ANOVA | Genotype | 2 | 72 | 1.426 | 0.2469 | WT, Home vs WT, Novel | |
| Environment | 1 | 72 | cHET, Home vs cHET, Novel | ||||
| Interaction | 2 | 72 | 0.7727 | 0.4656 | cKO, Home vs cKO, Novel | 0.6896 |
Two-way ANOVA analyses of genotype (WT, cHET, cKO), environment (home, novel), and/or sex (female, male) factors in self-grooming behaviors. DFn = Degrees of freedom numerator (between-subject degrees of freedom—1); DFd = Degrees of freedom denominator (within-subject degrees of freedom—between-subject degrees of freedom). See Additional file 2: Table S1 for within-group ANOVA comparisons and within-group N, Mean ± SEM
Fig. 2Elevated plus maze (EPM), open field test (OFT) and marble burying test (MBT) results among WT, cHET and cKO mice. All p > 0.13 (two-way ANOVA); see Table 2 for means ± SEM
EPM, OFT, and MBT
| Experiment: Fig. | Experiment: Fig. | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | DFn | DFd | F | p | Factor | DFn | DFd | F | p | |
| Two-way ANOVA | Genotype | 2 | 33 | 0.09343 | 0.9110 | Genotype | 2 | 33 | 0.1993 | 0.8203 |
| Sex | 1 | 33 | 1.178 | 0.2857 | Sex | 1 | 33 | 0.8636 | 0.3595 | |
| Interaction | 2 | 33 | 0.07359 | 0.9292 | Interaction | 2 | 33 | 0.006488 | 0.9935 | |
Two-way ANOVA analyses of genotype (WT, cHET, cKO) and sex (female, male) factors in EPM, OFT, and MBT behaviors. See Additional file 2: Table S2 for within-group ANOVA comparisons and within-group N, Mean ± SEM
Fig. 3Sociability test: time spent within 1 cm of a novel object (Obj) or a stranger mouse (S1). Times spent near Obj vs S1 are different overall (p = 0.0002, two-way ANOVA). WT and cHET mice exhibit differences in time spent with Obj vs S1 (i.e., “are sociable”; **p = 0.0026, *p = 0.0132, Šidák's multiple comparisons) while cKO mice do not (p = 0.7917, Šidák's multiple comparisons). See Table 3 for means ± SEM. Inset: Schematic (not to scale) of the experimental setup for sociability experiments. An object (Obj) was placed in one of the circles marked “α” or “β”, and a stranger mouse (S1) was kept inside the other circle. Experimental mice had the freedom to move around all three chambers
Sociability
| Factor | DFn | DFd | F | p | *Šidák's multiple comparisons | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Two-way ANOVA | Genotype | 2 | 80 | 2.811 | 0.0661 | WT, Object vs WT, Stranger 1 | |
| Chamber | 1 | 80 | cHET, Object vs cHET, Stranger 1 | ||||
| Interaction | 2 | 80 | 1.061 | 0.3508 | cKO, Object vs cKO, Stranger 1 | 0.7917 |
Two-way ANOVA analyses of genotype (WT, cHET, cKO), “chamber” (Object or Stranger 1), and/or sex (female, male) factors in sociability behaviors. See Additional file 2: Table S3 for within-group ANOVA comparisons and within-group N, Mean ± SEM
Preference for social novelty
| Factor | DFn | DFd | F | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Two-way ANOVA | Genotype | 2 | 78 | 1.358 | 0.2631 |
| Chamber | 1 | 78 | 0.7936 | 0.3758 | |
| Interaction | 2 | 78 | 1.546 | 0.2195 |
Two-way ANOVA analyses of genotype (WT, cHET, cKO), “chamber” (Object or Stranger 1), and/or sex (female, male) factors in preference for social novelty behaviors. See Additional file 2: Table S4 for within-group ANOVA comparisons and within-group N, Mean ± SEM
Location of presented data in the article, organized by experiment
| Experiment | Graphical representation | Overall N, mean, SEM. If applicable: two-way ANOVAs, Šidák's multiple comparisons | If applicable: Within-category ANOVAs, N, mean, SEM, three-way ANOVA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grooming | Fig. | Table | Additional file |
| EPM/OFT/MBT | Fig. | Table | Additional file |
| Sociability | Fig. | Table | Additional file |
| Pref Soc Novelty | Table | Additional file | |
| Cre + vs Cre− | Additional file | ||
| Brain morphology | Additional file | Additional file | |
| Sociability (by chamber) | Additional file | ||
| Preference for social novelty (by chamber) | Additional file | ||
| Sociability (opposite sex) | Additional file | Additional file | |
| Preference for social novelty (opposite sex) | Additional file | Additional file |