Effects of taurine on rat behaviors in three anxiety models
ABSTRACT In our previous studies using an elevated plus-maze test in mice, taurine was shown to present an anxiolytic-like effect after single and repeated administration. The aim of the present study was to investigate the anxiolytic and behavioral effects of taurine on rats in the open field, hole-board, and social interaction test compared to the positive control diazepam. Taurine (14, 42, and 126 mg/kg, i.p.) was administered 30 min before the tests. In the social interaction and hole-board tests, taurine (42 mg/kg) significantly increased social interaction time and the number and duration of head-dipping. In the open field test, taurine (126 mg/kg, i.p.) presented anxiolytic-like effects by increasing the number of center entries, time spent in the central area and the anti-thigmotactic score while having no effect on the locomotor activity. Results from these experiments suggest that taurine produces an anxiolytic-like effect in these animal models and may act as a modulator or anti-anxiety agent in the central nervous system.
SourceAvailable from: Paolo Bellavite[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: As part of a rigorous investigation into the effects of Gelsemium sempervirens on laboratory mice, we performed two complete series of experiments and published three scientific papers. A recent commentary has, however, called into question the reproducibility and validity of these findings. In this article we discuss the major issues raised by this critique within the framework of methodological aspects and the interpretation of results of high-dilution and homeopathic research. The charge of non-reproducibility is shown to be unfounded, because a same homeopathic medicine displayed the same direction of effects in two well-validated models (light-dark and open-field), albeit with nonlinear patterns. The double-blind protocols and statistics by means of ANOVA were performed appropriately and the difference between dilutions of Gelsemium (5cH, 7cH, 9cH and 30cH with variations according to model) and placebo was statistically highly significant. Our investigations brought to light some problems related with the lack of activity of buspirone and diazepam (conventional anxiolytic drugs used as control) on some behavioural parameters, suggesting that Gelsemium may have broader action, and raising doubts as to the reliability of benzodiazepines as positive controls for homeopathic treatments. Concerning the plausibility of experiments in this field, disputed on the grounds of alleged lack of dose-response effect, we note that the latter is not at all uncommon, and can be accounted for by a host of possible reasons. In conclusion, our research line showed reproducible and consistent effects of Gelsemium in laboratory mice.International Journal of High Speed Computing 01/2011; 10:325-337.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Clinical and preclinical data suggest that diabetes is often associated with anxiety. Insulin, a peptide hormone has been reported to have key functions in the brain and in alleviating several psychological impairments, occur as a consequence of diabetes. However, its effects in diabetes-induced anxiety are scanty. The present study examined whether; insulin can reverse the anxiety-like behavior in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes in mice. After 8-weeks of diabetes induced by STZ (200 mg/kg, intraperitoneally (i.p.)), mice were given insulin (1-2 IU/kg/day, i.p.)/ diazepam (1 mg/kg/day, i.p.)/ vehicle for 14 days and evaluated for behavioral effects in three validated models of anxiety viz. elevated plus maze (EPM), light-dark (L/D) and hole board (HB) tests. STZ-induced diabetic mice elicited significant behavioral effects which include, decreased percentage open arm entries and time in EPM, reduced latency and time spent in light chamber in L/D, decreased number of head dips, squares crossed and rearings in HB tests respectively. Insulin treatment attenuated the behavioral effects evoked by STZ-induced diabetes in mice as indicated by increased open arms activity in EPM, decreased aversion in light chamber during L/D test and increased exploratory behavior in HB test. In conclusion, this study revealed that insulin can reverse anxiety-like behavior in STZ-induced diabetes in mice.Metabolic Brain Disease 04/2014; 29(3). DOI:10.1007/s11011-014-9540-5 · 2.40 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Asparagus racemosus Linn. (AR) is used worldwide as a medicinal plant. In the present study, the anxiolytic activity of standardized methanolic extract of root of AR (MAR) was evaluated in open-field test (OFT), hole-board, and elevated plus maze (EPM) tests. Rats received oral pretreatment of MAR in the doses of 50, 100, and 200 mg/kg daily for 7 days and then were evaluated for the anxiolytic activity in different animal models. Both MAR (100 and 200 mg/kg) and diazepam (1 mg/kg, p.o.) increased the grooming behavior, number of central squares crossed, and time spent in the central area during OFT. Further, MAR (100 and 200 mg/kg) increased the head-dip and head-dip/sniffing behavior, and decreased sniffing activity in hole-board test. Furthermore, MAR (100 and 200 mg/kg) increased the percentage entries and time spent to open arm in EPM test paradigm. The anxiolytic activity in the experimental models was similar to that of diazepam. MAR (100 and 200 mg/kg) enhanced the level of amygdalar serotonin and norepinephrine. It also increased the expression of 5-HT2A receptors in the amygdala. In another set of experiment, flumazenil attenuated the anxiolytic effect of minimum effective dose of MAR (100 mg/kg) in OFT, hole-board, and EPM tests, indicating GABAA-mediated mechanism. Moreover, the anxiolytic dose of MAR did not show sedative-like effect in OFT and EPM tests compared to diazepam (6 mg/kg, p.o.). Thus, the anxiolytic response of MAR may involve GABA and serotonergic mechanisms. These preclinical data show that AR can be a potential agent for treatment of anxiety disorders.Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology 02/2014; 34(4). DOI:10.1007/s10571-014-0035-z · 2.20 Impact Factor