| Literature DB >> 35493332 |
Ana Carolina Castro1,2, Patricia Monteiro1,2.
Abstract
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder mainly characterized by social-communication impairments, repetitive behaviors and altered sensory perception. Auditory hypersensitivity is the most common sensory-perceptual abnormality in ASD, however, its underlying neurobiological mechanisms remain elusive. Consistently with reports in ASD patients, animal models for ASD present sensory-perception alterations, including auditory processing impairments. Here we review the current knowledge regarding auditory dysfunction in rodent models of ASD, exploring both shared and distinct features among them, mechanistic and molecular underpinnings, and potential therapeutic approaches. Overall, auditory dysfunction in ASD models seems to arise from impaired central processing. Depending on the model, impairments may arise at different steps along the auditory pathway, from auditory brainstem up to the auditory cortex. Common defects found across models encompass atypical tonotopicity in different regions of the auditory pathway, temporal and spectral processing impairments and histological differences. Imbalance between excitation and inhibition (E/I imbalance) is one of the most well-supported mechanisms explaining the auditory phenotype in the ASD models studied so far and seems to be linked to alterations in GABAergic signaling. Such E/I imbalance may have a large impact on the development of the auditory pathway, influencing the establishment of connections responsible for normal sound processing.Entities:
Keywords: auditory dysfunction; autism spectrum disorder (ASD); rodent models; sensory perception; sound processing
Year: 2022 PMID: 35493332 PMCID: PMC9043325 DOI: 10.3389/fnmol.2022.845155
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Mol Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5099 Impact factor: 5.639
FIGURE 1Monoaural ascending auditory pathway. Auditory input arriving to the cochlea is transmitted through the auditory nerve (AN) to the cochlear nucleus (CN) in the brainstem. In this nucleus, AN bifurcates to the ventral cochlear nucleus (VCN) and the dorsal cochlear nucleus (DCN). Information is directed to the ipsilateral (orange arrows) and contralateral (red arrows) SOC (superior olivary complex), traveling through several of its nuclei, namely the lateral superior olive (LSO), medial superior olive (MSO), and medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB). Both contralateral and ipsilateral input from the brainstem reach the inferior colliculus (IC) in the midbrain through fibers of the lateral lemniscus (LL), synapsing in the LL nucleus (LLN). From the IC, fibers project ipsilaterally and contralaterally to the medial geniculate body (MGB). The MGB is located in the thalamus and is the brain region that precedes the auditory cortex (AC) in the information flow of ascending auditory pathway (Knipper et al., 2013; Di Bonito and Studer, 2017).
FIGURE 2Examples of some experimental approaches to study auditory alterations in rodents. Auditory brainstem response (ABR): Schematic representation of electrodes placement for ABR recording (inset; top left). Representation of the auditory pathway and corresponding ABR waves generated upon sound stimulation. Measuring ABR is a non-invasive to assess the sum of evoked potentials that occur in the first milliseconds after sound stimulation across the auditory system (Moller, 2006). Wave I is generated by signal propagation through the auditory nerve (AN), wave II through the cochlear nuclei (CN), wave III through the superior olivary complex (SOC), wave IV through the lateral lemniscus (LL), and wave V through the inferior colliculus (IC) (Knipper et al., 2013). LSO, lateral superior olive; MSO, medial superior olive; MNTB, medial nucleus of the trapezoid body. Electrophysiological recordings: Local field potentials (LFP) and spiking activity can be obtained from in vivo electrophysiological recordings in the auditory cortex. LFPs represent the summed activity of a certain population of neurons that is recorded in a specific region, while spiking refers to a single neuron activity. Acoustic startle response (ASR) and prepulse inhibition (PPI): The ASR is a short-latency response to a startle eliciting stimulus (SES), considered a defensive reaction to a strong and sudden stimulus that prepares the individual to face a potential threat. It is characterized by a rapid contraction of facial and skeletal muscles (red arrows). This response is preserved across mammalian species, involving the brainstem, and the auditory and vestibular systems. The PPI test evaluates the attenuation of the ASR by presentation of a non-startling stimulus immediately preceding the SES. This enables to quantitatively assess the sensory-motor gating function, and the ability to effectively filter sensory information, hence preventing sensory overload (Koch and Schnitzler, 1997; Gómez-Nieto et al., 2020). Behavioral assessment of auditory processing: representation of behavioral paradigms to measure the ASR attenuation by a previously presented auditory cue. While in PPI test the type of stimulus used as cue is the same as in the SES, this set of behavioral tests takes advantage of other types of auditory cues for ASR inhibition. Adequately processing these auditory cues underlies an effective ASR inhibition, which in turn becomes a measure for auditory discrimination of different types of auditory cues. (i) The subject is exposed to a white-noise background and a silence gap of variable duration in the background noise is used as cue for the upcoming SES; (ii) and (iii) The subject is exposed to a background pure tone. The cue preceding the SES is a momentaneous change in frequency. In (ii) the duration of the cue is constant, but the frequency varies between trials and in (iii) the duration of the cue is variable, but its frequency is the same across trials (Truong et al., 2015; Gómez-Nieto et al., 2020). Fear conditioning paradigm: (1) Subjects are habituated to contexts A and B; (2) Subjects are conditioned in context A by pairing a tone with shock; (3) Context and tone recall are performed 24 h later. Freezing behavior is evaluated and compared across the whole test (Reinhard et al., 2019). Although the central role of the amygdala in the process of fear conditioning is well-accepted, this is not the only critical player in this process. The auditory thalamus is increasingly considered as an important sensory integration center in the network involved in fear conditioning. Hence, this paradigm may also provide valuable information regarding auditory processing (Gründemann, 2021).
| A1 | Primary auditory cortex | ERP | Event related potentials | PAF | Posterior auditory field |
| AAF | Anterior auditory field | FM | Frequency modulated | PNN | Perineuronal net |
| ABR | Auditory brainstem response | FMRP | Fragile X mental retardation protein | PPI | Prepulse inhibition |
| AC | Auditory cortex | FXS | Fragile X syndrome | PV | Parvalbumin |
| AN | Auditory nerve | IC | Inferior colliculus | SES | Startle eliciting stimulus |
| ASD | Autism Spectrum Disorder | LFP | Local field potential | SG | Silent gap |
| ASR | Acoustic startle response | LL | Lateral lemniscus | SOC | Superior olivary complex |
| CB | Calbindin | LLN | Lateral lemniscus nucleus | SPON | Superior paraolivary nucleus |
| CF | Characteristic sound frequency | LSO | Lateral superior olive | TH | Tyrosine hydroxylase |
| CN | Cochlear nucleus | MeCP2 | Methyl-CpG binding protein | USV | Ultrasonic vocalization |
| CNIC | Central nucleus of the inferior colliculus | VAF | Ventral auditory field | ||
|
| Contactin-associated protein-like 2 | MGB | Medial geniculate body | VCN | Ventral cochlear nucleus |
| CR | Calretinin | MMP-9 | Matrix metalloproteinase-9 | VNLL | Ventral nucleus of the LL |
| DCN | Dorsal cochlear nucleus | MNTB | Medial nucleus of the trapezoid body | VPA | Valproic acid |
| DNLL | Dorsal nucleus of the lateral lemniscus | MSO | Medial superior olive | α7-nAChR | α7-nicotinic acetylcholine receptor |