ArticlePDF Available

Cortagine, a specific agonist of corticotropin-releasing factor subtype 1, is anxiogenic and antidepressive in the mouse model


Abstract and Figures

Two subtypes of the corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) receptor, CRF(1) and CRF(2), differentially modulate brain functions such as anxiety and memory. To facilitate the analysis of their differential involvement, we developed a CRF(1)-specific peptidic agonist by synthesis of chimeric peptides derived from human/rat CRF, ovine CRF (oCRF), and sauvagine (Svg). High affinity to the CRF-binding protein was prevented by introduction of glutamic acid in the binding site of the ligand. The resulting chimeric peptide, [Glu(21),Ala(40)][Svg(1-12)]x[human/rat CRF(14-30)]x[Svg(30-40)], named cortagine, was analyzed pharmacologically in cell culture by using human embryonic kidney-293 cells transfected with cDNA coding for CRF(1) or CRF(2), in autoradiographic experiments, and in behavior experiments using male C57BL/6J mice for its modulatory action on anxiety- and depression-like behaviors with the elevated plus-maze test and the forced swim test (FST), respectively. We observed that cortagine was more selective than oCRF, frequently used as CRF(1)-specific agonist, in stimulating the transfected cells to release cAMP. Cortagine's specificity was demonstrated in autoradiographic experiments by its selective binding to CRF(1) of brain sections of the mouse. After injection into the brain ventricles, it enhanced anxiety-like behavior on the elevated plus-maze at a lower dose than oCRF. Whereas at high doses, oCRF injected into the lateral intermediate septum containing predominantly CRF(2) increased anxiety-like behavior as CRF(2)-specific agonists do, cortagine did not. In contrast to its anxiogenic actions, cortagine reduced significantly the immobility time in the FST as described for antidepressive drugs. Thus, cortagine combines anxiogenic properties with antidepressive effects in the FST.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Cortagine, a specific agonist of corticotropin-
releasing factor receptor subtype 1, is anxiogenic
and antidepressive in the mouse model
Hossein Tezval*, Olaf Jahn*, Cedomir Todorovic, Astrid Sasse, Klaus Eckart, and Joachim Spiess
Department of Molecular Neuroendocrinology, Max Planck Institute for Experimental Medicine, Hermann Rein Strasse 3, D-37075 Go¨ ttingen, Germany
Communicated by Michael G. Rosenfeld, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, May 6, 2004 (received for review December 16, 2003)
Two subtypes of the corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) receptor,
and CRF
, differentially modulate brain functions such as
anxiety and memory. To facilitate the analysis of their differential
involvement, we developed a CRF
-specific peptidic agonist by
synthesis of chimeric peptides derived from humanrat CRF, ovine
CRF (oCRF), and sauvagine (Svg). High affinity to the CRF-binding
protein was prevented by introduction of glutamic acid in the
binding site of the ligand. The resulting chimeric peptide,
][humanrat CRF
], named
cortagine, was analyzed pharmacologically in cell culture by using
human embryonic kidney-293 cells transfected with cDNA coding
for CRF
or CRF
, in autoradiographic experiments, and in behavior
experiments using male C57BL6J mice for its modulatory action on
anxiety- and depression-like behaviors with the elevated plus-
maze test and the forced swim test (FST), respectively. We ob-
served that cortagine was more selective than oCRF, frequently
used as CRF
-specific agonist, in stimulating the transfected cells to
release cAMP. Cortagine’s specificity was demonstrated in auto-
radiographic experiments by its selective binding to CRF
of brain
sections of the mouse. After injection into the brain ventricles, it
enhanced anxiety-like behavior on the elevated plus-maze at a
lower dose than oCRF. Whereas at high doses, oCRF injected into
the lateral intermediate septum containing predominantly CRF
increased anxiety-like behavior as CRF
-specific agonists do,
cortagine did not. In contrast to its anxiogenic actions, cortagine
reduced significantly the immobility time in the FST as described
for antidepressive drugs. Thus, cortagine combines anxiogenic
properties with antidepressive effects in the FST.
orticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), a 41-residue peptide
hormone (1), is the major regulator of the hypothalamus–
pituitary–adrenal axis (2), modulates important brain functions
such as anxiety, learning, food intake, and locomotion, and is
involved in anxiety and mood disorders (3, 4). CRF acts through
two G protein-dependent CRF receptor subtypes, CRF
, derived from two separate genes (reviewed in ref. 5) and
binds with high affinity to a binding protein (CRFBP), which
serves as a pharmacologically significant reservoir of endoge-
nous CRF (6, 7). Several CRF
and CRF
splice variants have
been identified (5, 8). In rodents, only the splice variants CRF
, and CRF
are of physiological relevance (5). CRF
are produced in brain tissue, whereas CRF
is mainly
located in blood vessels (9).
and CRF
participate differentially in various biological
functions (3). Thus, activation of the hypothalamus–pituitary–
adrenal axis in response to a stressful stimulus is mainly achieved
through CRF
(10). It was demonstrated by gene deletion
experiments that anxiety-like behavior is enhanced predomi-
nantly through CRF
(11, 12), whereas it is reduced through
(10, 13). Pharmacological experiments discriminating
between regional actions of CRF
and CRF
revealed that CRF
of the lateral intermediate septum mediates stress-induced en-
hancement of anxiety-like behavior (14), whereas CRF
through the brain ventricles is anxiolytic (13). In contrast, CRF
accessed by CRF via the brain ventricles enhances anxiety-like
behavior (15). Several natural CRF-like peptides with different
CRF receptor subtype specificity have been characterized. Thus,
humanrat CRF (hrCRF) and ovine CRF (oCRF) exhibit
preference for CRF
, whereas urocortin (Ucn)I (16) is a non-
selective ligand (3, 5). Recently, UcnII (17, 18) and UcnIII (18,
19) were identified on the basis of homology analysis of data
derived from genomic sequence databases and characterized as
highly CRF
-selective agonists. In contrast, no natural agonists
with a similar selectivity for CRF
have been identified to date,
and no peptidic CRF
-specific agonist has been synthesized.
At this time, oCRF is the agonist of choice for the selective
stimulation of CRF
in behavioral experiments, because it
preferentially binds to CRF
. oCRF’s binding constants for
and CRF
differ by two orders of magnitude (20, 21).
However, because of the high local agonist concentration that
often occurs when drugs are directly administered into the
animal brain, the use of oCRF for the stimulation of CRF
accompanied by unwanted CRF
-mediated side effects (C.T.
and J.S., unpublished data). In addition, displacement of endog-
enous ligand from CRFBP (6) by applied CRF agonists may
release CRF-like peptides and thus interfere with the desired
selective stimulation of CRF
. To facilitate further elucidation of
the physiological role of CRF
, we developed a selective and
potent CRF
agonist on the basis of a chimeric peptide strategy.
Peptide Synthesis. Peptides were synthesized, purified, and char-
acterized as described in refs. 22 and 23.
Binding Assays and Measurement of Intracellular cAMP Accumulation.
Crude membrane fractions were prepared from human embryonic
kidney-293 (HEK-293) cells stably transfected with cDNA encod-
ing either rat CRF
) or mouse CRF
) (22). Rat
CRFBP (rCRFBP) was produced by HEK-293 cells stably trans-
fected with cDNA encoding rCRFBP C-terminally fused to a His
sequence (23). Ligand binding analysis was performed with scin-
tillation proximity assays (21, 24). For competition binding assays of
and rCRFBP, [
]hrCRF was used as radiolabeled
peptide, whereas [
]sauvagine (Svg) was used in a binding
assay for mCRF
. The HEK-293 cells were plated into 24-well cell
culture plates (25). Intracellular cAMP was determined with the
Biotrak cAMP
I scintillation proximity assays system (Amer-
sham Pharmacia Biosciences) according to the manufacturer’s
manual. Stock solutions of peptides were prepared in 10 mM
aqueous acetic acid except for oCRF and cortagine, which were
dissolved in PBS (pH 7.4).
Abbreviations: aSvg-30, antisauvagine-30; CRF, corticotropin-releasing factor; CRF
receptor subtype 1; CRF
, CRF receptor subtype 2; CRFBP, CRF-binding protein; EPM,
elevated plus-maze; FST, forced swim test; hrCRF, humanrat CRF; i.c.v., intracerebroven-
tricularly; mCRF
, mouse CRF
; oCRF, ovine CRF; rCRF
, rat CRF
; rCRFBP, rat CRFBP; Svg,
sauvagine; Ucn, urocortin.
*H.T. and O.J. contributed equally to this work.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:
© 2004 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA
June 22, 2004
vol. 101
no. 25 www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0403159101
Determination of Maximum Solubility and Isoelectric Point. After
dissolving the peptides in artificial cerebrospinal fluid (aCSF;
124 mM NaCl26.4 mM NaHCO
10 mM glucose3.3 mM
KCl2.5 mM CaCl
2.4 mM MgSO
1.2 mM KH
7.4, the maximum solubility c
was determined by measure-
ment of the peptide concentration in the supernate of a precip-
itate (21). The isoelectric point of the peptides was determined
by isoelectric focusing with a Bio-Rad IEF cell system using
Bio-Rad IEF strips in the pH range 310 (21).
Preparation of Peptide Solutions for Behavioral Experiments. All
peptides were dissolved in aCSF except for antisauvagine-30
(aSvg-30) (22), which was initially dissolved in 10 mM aqueous
acetic acid and diluted with 2 aCSF. The final pH of the
peptide solutions was 7.4. The exact peptide concentrations of
the injection solutions were determined by amino acid analysis
as described in ref. 22.
Animals. Nine-week-old male C57BL6J mice (Centre DElevage
Janvier, Le Genest Saint Isle, France) were individually housed
in Macrolon cages as recommended by the Society for Labora-
tory Animal Science (Hannover, Germany). All experiments
were carried out in accordance with the European Council
Directive (86609EEC) with the permission of the District
Government of Braunschweig, State of Lower Saxony, Germany,
which is in full agreement with the American Psychological
Association (Washington, DC) ethical guidelines. All efforts
were made to minimize animal suffering. The number of mice
per group was 911.
Autoradiography. Coronal sections (20
m) of CRF
mice (provided by Wylie Vale, The Salk Institute for
Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA) were thawed to room temper-
ature and allowed to dry for 20 min. The sections were prein-
cubated for 1 min in incubation buffer (PBS supplemented with
10 mM MgCl
2 mM EGTA0.1% BSA, pH 7.0) and then
incubated for 40 min at room temperature in incubation buffer
containing 200 pM [
]Svg, a nonspecific CRF receptor
ligand. Selective displacement was achieved with 1
M cortagine
at CRF
or mouse UcnII at CRF
. Nonspecific binding was
determined by addition of 1
M Svg. The slides were then
washed for 2 min with ice-cold PBS supplemented with 0.01%
Triton X-100 at pH 7.0 and water. Slides were dried rapidly
under a stream of cold air and exposed to Biomax MR film
(Kodak) for 4 days at 80°C.
Behavioral Experiments. Anxiety-like behavior of C57BL6J mice
cannulated in the lateral ventricles or lateral intermediate septal
area (14) was examined 30 min after injection of the CRF
agonist under investigation for 5 min in the elevated plus-maze
(EPM) test (26). The CRF
-selective antagonist aSvg-30 in aCSF
or aCSF alone was injected 45 min before the EPM test. The
behavior of the mice was recorded by a video camera connected
to a computer and analyzed by the software
Bad Homburg, Germany). The time spent, distance crossed, and
number of entries into the open arms, closed arms, and center
were recorded. Shift of preference from the open to the closed
arms was interpreted as an increase of anxiety-like behavior.
Locomotor activity was determined with this test by the distance
For the forced swim test (FST), C57BL6J mice cannulated in
the lateral ventricles were subjected to swim sessions in individ-
ual glass cylinders (height, 39 cm; diameter, 21.7 cm) containing
water 15-cm deep at 2325°C. On day 1, all animals were placed
in the cylinder for a preswim session of 15 min. On the test day
24 h later (day 2), the mice were subjected to a test swim session
for 6 min. The water was changed between subjects. All test swim
sessions were recorded by a video camera positioned directly
above the cylinder. A competent observer blind to treatment
scored the videotapes. The behavioral measure scored was the
duration of immobility, defined as time spent still or only using
righting movements to keep the head above water. An increase
in immobility time was interpreted as an increase of depression-
like behavior. In all behavioral experiments, the injections were
carried out bilaterally, and the cannula placement was confirmed
for each mouse by histological examination of the brains after
methylene blue injection (14). The behavioral data are expressed
as mean SEM and were analyzed by using two- and one-way
ANOVA, with the BonferroniDunn test applied, post hoc, for
individual between-group comparisons at the P 0.05 level of
Design of Chimeric Peptides and Analysis of Their Affinity and Bio-
logical Potency.
For our chimeric peptide strategy we selected
oCRF and hrCRF on the basis of their preferential binding to
and Svg (27) because of its high hydrophilicity and low
isoelectric point (pH 5.1) enhancing solubility in aqueous solu-
tion (21). The sequences of oCRF (compound 1, Fig. 1) and
hrCRF (compound 2, Fig. 1) were divided into N-terminal
(residues 113), central (residues 1430), and C-terminal (res-
Fig. 1. Development of cortagine as chimeric peptide derived from oCRF, hrCRF, and Svg. The three main building blocks of the chimeric peptides, the
N-terminal, central, and C-terminal domains, are indicated. Sequences derived from hrCRF, Svg, and oCRF are underlain in gray, black, and white, respectively.
Z, pyroglutamic acid.
Tezval et al. PNAS
June 22, 2004
vol. 101
no. 25
idues 3140) domains (Fig. 1) on the basis of the recent finding
that CRF contains segregated receptor-binding sites at its N
terminus and C terminus (28). These domains were used as
building blocks and combined with sequences from Svg (com-
pound 3, Fig. 1) to generate different chimeric peptides (Fig. 1).
It was observed that compound 5, but not compound 4, exhibited
low affinity for CRF
and high selectivity for CRF
(Table 1).
Therefore, it was concluded that residues 1430 of hrCRF were
responsible for a decrease in affinity to CRF
. This conclusion
was in agreement with the finding that compound 6 containing
the central domain of hrCRF, but not compound 7, was
selective for CRF
(Table 1). On the basis of its low affinity to
, compound 6 was selected for further development. An
additional rationale for the selection of compound 6 as lead
compound was its N-terminal pyroglutamic acid derived from
the Svg sequence (Fig. 1). The presence of this cyclic residue may
prevent degradation by major aminopeptidases that require a
-amino group for their action (29) and thereby increase the
stability of compound 6 under in vivo conditions.
On the basis of the finding that neither Glu-2 of the N-terminal
domain nor the central residues Ala-22, Arg-23, and Glu-25 of
hrCRF have a significant influence on receptor selectivity (21,
30), only the C-terminal residues 38, 39, and 41 were considered
for amino acid replacements. A comparison of the sequences of
oCRF, hrCRF, and Svg revealed that oCRF binding preferen-
tially to CRF
shares residues Leu-38 and Asp-39 with the
nonselective Svg in equivalent positions (Fig. 1). It was therefore
hypothesized that Ala-41 of oCRF may contribute to the binding
preference of this ligand. This hypothesis was first tested by the
synthesis and characterization of [Ala
]hrCRF. In comparison
with hrCRF, [Ala
]hrCRF showed an increase in CRF
selectivity by a factor of 3 and thus a similar selectivity as oCRF
(data not shown). As expected on the basis of this result, a
peptide highly selective for CRF
was obtained when the same
replacement was carried out for compound 6 to generate com-
pound 8 (Fig. 1). In comparison with compound 6, compound 8
exhibited a 5-fold increase in affinity to CRF
, whereas only a
slight increase of affinity to CRF
was found (Table 1).
The high affinity of compound 8 to CRFBP (Table 1) was
removed by employing the recently reported single amino acid
switch concept determining the affinity to CRFBP (21). Ac-
cordingly, Ala-21 of compound 8 was replaced by a Glu residue,
an exchange that has been shown to decrease the affinity of
hrCRF to CRFBP by two orders of magnitude (21). Compound
9 (Fig. 1), obtained by this change, bound with high affinity to
, whereas the affinity to CRFBP was abolished (Table 1).
Replacement of Met-20 with norleucine to prevent the forma-
tion of methionine sulfoxide, a modification that is known to
abolish the bioactivity of CRF-like peptides (2), resulted in a
significant decrease of affinity to CRF
(data not shown) and was
therefore not introduced. We named compound 9, the final
product of our development, cortagine. The overall enhanced
specificity of cortagine over oCRF was indicated by the ratio of
the binding affinities to CRF
and CRF
); Table 1]. For cortagine and oCRF, values of 208
and 89, respectively, were found.
The biological potency of cortagine and oCRF was evaluated
by the determination of the EC
values for intracellular accu-
mulation of cAMP in transfected HEK-293 cells. In agreement
with the binding data, the biological potencies of cortagine and
oCRF were high at rCRF
and about one to two orders of
magnitude lower at mCRF
(Table 2). The enhanced selectivity
of cortagine was reflected by the ratios of the biological poten-
cies [EC
); Table 2]. Values of 89 and
19 were found for cortagine and oCRF, respectively.
By the analysis of the maximal solubility of cortagine, it was
determined that cortagine, like oCRF, was soluble at a concen-
tration of up to 1,000
M (Table 2), so that there was no
limitation for behavioral experiments in view of the agonist
doses typically used.
Binding of Cortagine to Native CRF
. Autoradiography of mouse
brain sections from CRF
and CRF
mice was performed
to demonstrate cortagines selectivity for native CRF
(Fig. 2).
The [
]Svg-binding patterns in the brains of CRF
mice (Fig. 2b) and of CRF
mice after treatment with
cortagine (Fig. 2d) did not significantly differ. CRF receptor
visible in the choroid plexus of the brain sections of these animals
(Fig. 2 b and d) was identified as CRF
by displacement with
UcnII (Fig. 2c).
Modulation of Anxiety-Like Behavior by Cortagine. The behavioral
effects of cortagine were determined in the EPM test and the
FST. It has been demonstrated earlier that activation of CRF
accessed through the brain ventricles enhances anxiety-like
behavior in the EPM test (21), the most frequently used rodent
model of anxiety, and suppresses locomotor activity (31) under
various conditions. Therefore, we performed a series of behavior
experiments with the EPM test. A two-way ANOVA with
treatment and dose as between-subject factors indicated signif-
icant treatment and dose main effects and significant interaction
after administration of peptides intracerebroventricularly (i.c.v.)
into the lateral ventricles of male C57BL6J mice 30 min before
testing. The values for the percent time spent in the open arms
(1, 80)
16.57, P 0.05 for treatment; F
(4, 80)
36.68, P 0.05
for dose; and F
(4, 80)
5.38; P 0.05 for interaction] (Fig. 3a)
and number of open arm entries [F
(1, 80)
10.66, P 0.05 for
treatment; F
(4, 80)
28.27, P 0.05 for dose; and F
(4, 80)
P 0.05 for interaction] (Fig. 3b) revealed a significantly higher
anxiogenic potency of cortagine than of oCRF (Bonferroni
Table 1. Binding afnites of oCRF, h/rCRF, Svg, and their
chimeric analogs
1 1.8 (1.12.4) 160 (120200) 450 (420480)
1.6 (1.31.9) 42 (2559) 0.54 (0.380.71)
0.52 (0.290.74) 0.9 (0.721.1) 57 (4570)
4 0.47 (0.180.77) 0.69 (0.450.93) ND
5 2.0 (0.803.1) 330 (140530) ND
6 9.5 (4.814) 700 (490910) ND
7 1.8 (0.752.8) 0.98 (0.591.4) ND
8 1.8 (1.42.1) 400 (360450) 1.9 (1.82.0)
2.6 (1.63.4) 540 (480590) 1,000
values are the mean of at least four experiments performed in dupli-
cate; 95% confidence intervals are given in parentheses. ND, not determined.
*The intermediate compounds of the agonist development were not tested
for their affinity to rCRFBP.
Binding data taken from Eckart et al. (21).
Table 2. Comparison of the pharmacological and
physicochemical properties of cortagine and oCRF
Biological potency EC
Cortagine 0.18 (0.10–0.26) 16 (11–20) 1,000 4.8
oCRF 0.47 (0.14–0.80) 8.8 (6.0–12) 1,000 6.4
values are the mean of at least four experiments performed in dupli-
cate; 95% confidence intervals are given in parentheses.
*Isoelectric points were determined by isoelectric focusing.
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0403159101 Tezval et al.
Dunn test, P 0.05, for percent time spent and number of open
arm entries of the EPM). The significant interaction was due to
differences between the 30-ng doses of cortagine and oCRF in
modulating anxiety-like behavior in the EPM test as confirmed
by analyses of simple main effects of dose. In particular, 30 ng
of cortagine but not of oCRF significantly decreased the percent
time spent in the open arms [F
(1, 18)
15.37, P 0.05] and
number of open arm entries [F
(1, 18)
10.89, P 0.05] of the
EPM test. Thus, cortagine was more potent than oCRF under
these conditions. Interestingly, the peptides tested did not differ
in their ability [F
(1, 80)
0.85, P 0.05] to reduce locomotor
activity (Fig. 3c).
We also investigated the specificity of cortagine by monitoring
the EPM behavior of C57BL6J mice after injection of cortagine
into the lateral intermediate septum, which predominantly con-
tains CRF
(32). Administration of 100 ng (21 pmol) of oCRF,
but not of 100 ng (23 pmol) of cortagine into the lateral septum,
30 min before testing in the EPM exerted a profound anxiogenic
effect as indicated by a decreased percent time spent in the open
arms [F
(3, 31)
7.32, P 0.05] (BonferroniDunn test, P 0.05
vs. aCSF) and number of open arm entries [F
(3, 31)
6.34; P
0.05] (BonferroniDunn test, P 0.05 vs. aCSF) (Fig. 4 a and
b) without affecting the locomotor activity [F
(3, 31)
1.16; P
0.05] (Fig. 4c) in the EPM. Thus, the differences between the
intrinsic in vitro activities of cortagine and oCRF to activate
(Table 2) were confirmed by the behavioral observations.
When 400 ng (110 pmol) of the CRF
-selective antagonist
aSvg-30 was injected intraseptally 15 min before the application
of 100 ng of oCRF, the anxiogenic action of oCRF in the EPM
test was completely prevented. In view of the specificity of
aSvg-30 selectively blocking CRF
(14), it was concluded that the
anxiogenic action of oCRF was mediated by septal CRF
Modulation of the Immobility in the FST. Previous studies have
demonstrated that antagonism of CRF
decreases the immobil-
ity time in the FST, a rodent model of depression-like behavior
(33, 34). To examine the effect of selective activation of CRF
the immobility time, C57BL6J mice were injected with cortag-
ine and tested in the FST. One group of mice was injected i.c.v.
with 300 ng (68 pmol) of cortagine or 300 ng (64 pmol) of oCRF
30 min before the preswim session (day 1) and examined in the
test swim session 24 h later (day 2). The second group of mice
was exposed to the preswim session without injection (day 1).
However, 300 ng (68 pmol) of cortagine or 300 ng (64 pmol) of
oCRF was administered 30 min before the test swim session 24 h
later (day 2). Interestingly, a two-way ANOVA with treatment
and order (prepreswim vs. pretest swim injection) as between-
subject factors revealed significant treatment and order main
effects and treatment order interaction for immobility time
during the preswim session [F
(2, 41)
10.24, P 0.05 treatment;
(1, 41)
19.52, P 0.05 order; and F
(2, 41)
5.63, P 0.05
treatment order] and test swim session [F
(2, 41)
19.93, P
0.05 treatment; F
(1, 41)
34.07, P 0.05 order; and F
(1, 41)
10.65, P 0.05 treatment order] in the FST. BonferroniDunn
post hoc analysis showed that prepreswim or pretest swim
treatment with cortagine or oCRF significantly decreased the
immobility time during the subsequent swim sessions in com-
parison with the aCSF treatment (P 0.05 vs. aCSF) (Fig. 5 a
and b). Similarly, prepreswim injection of the two peptides
significantly decreased the immobility time during the preswim
session (P 0.05 vs. test swim session), whereas the pretest swim
Fig. 2. Autoradiography of CRF receptor subtypes in the mouse brain. (a and
]Svg-binding (200 pM) on coronal sections at the level of the
hippocampus (Hipp) of WT and CRF
mice. (c and d) Selective displacement
of CRF
or CRF
with UcnII or cortagine, respectively, on brain sections from WT
mice. Amg, amygdala; CP, choroid plexus; Ctx, cortex.
Fig. 3. Enhancement of anxiety-like behavior by cortagine. i.c.v. adminis-
tered 30 ng (6.8 pmol), 100 ng (23 pmol), and 300 ng (68 pmol) of cortagine
produced increased anxiety-like behavior and reduced locomotor activity as
indicated by the time spent on the open arms (a), number of entries into the
open arms (b), and total distance traveled (c) on the EPM. i.c.v. administered
100 ng (21 pmol) and 300 ng (64 pmol) of oCRF also signicantly decreased the
time spent on the open arms (a), number of entries into the open arms (b), and
total distance traveled (c) on the EPM. Statistically signicant differences:
BonferroniDunn test;
, P 0.05 vs. control (aCSF injection); a, P 0.05 vs.
oCRF at respective dose.
Tezval et al. PNAS
June 22, 2004
vol. 101
no. 25
injection exerted a similar effect during the test swim session
(P 0.05 vs. preswim session) (Fig. 5 a and b). Analysis of simple
main effects of treatment revealed that injection of cortagine but
not oCRF before the preswim session resulted in a significantly
reduced immobility time during the test swim session 24 h later
(2, 22)
5.94, P 0.05] (BonferroniDunn test, P 0.05 vs.
oCRF-injected group) (Fig. 5b). No such difference was ob-
served between cortagine and oCRF-pretreated mice during the
preswim session [F
(2, 22)
9.65, P 0.05] (BonferroniDunn
test, P 0.05 cortagine- vs. oCRF-injected group) (Fig. 5a).
It had to be considered that the different effects of cortagine
and oCRF could be explained by an increased half-life time of
cortagine. This possibility was tested by i.c.v. injecting 300 ng (68
pmol) of cortagine and 300 ng (64 pmol) of oCRF, respectively
(day 1), 24 h before the test swim session (day 2) (Fig. 5c). As
an additional control, the same mice were injected i.c.v. 24 h later
with 300 ng of cortagine or oCRF and subjected to a 6-min retest
swim 30 min after injection (Fig. 5c). A two-way ANOVA with
treatment as between-subject factor and time (day 2 vs. day 3) as
within-subject factor revealed significant treatment [F
(2, 21)
7.98, P 0.05] and time [F
(1, 21)
41.51, P 0.05] main effects,
and treatment time interaction [F
(2, 21)
92.24; P 0.05]. The
significant interaction was produced by the fact that the groups
did not differ on day 2 [F
(2, 21)
0.98, P 0.05], but differences
appeared on day 3 [F
(2, 21)
25.08, P 0.05] (BonferroniDunn
test, P 0.05 vs. aCSF). These results excluded the possibility
that the prolonged action of cortagine was responsible for its
differential effects on immobility time in FST.
By combining sequences from Svg, hrCRF, and oCRF, cortag-
ine was developed (Fig. 1). Cortagines specificity and potency
were initially established by its selective and high affinity to
of transfected HEK-293 cells and its potency to release
cAMP from these cells. Cortagines selective binding to native
of brain sections of the mouse was demonstrated in
autoradiographic experiments with CRF
-deficient mice and
their WT littermates (Fig. 2).
Because cortagine did not exhibit high affinity binding to
CRFBP, it was excluded that the effective dose of cortagine was
decreased by binding to CRFBP and diluted by endogenous
CRF-like peptide released from CRFBP.
It has to be considered that rat CRF
and mouse CRF
produced by transfected cells and not mouse CRF
and CRF
the predominant splice variant of the rodent brain (9), were used
for the pharmacological characterization of cortagine. However,
the high affinity of cortagine for mouse CRF
was demonstrated
by its potency to enhance anxiety-like behavior after injection
i.c.v. (Fig. 3). It has been earlier established that CRF
by oCRF or hrCRF injected i.c.v. mediates the enhancement of
anxiety-like behaviors (31). The selectivity of cortagine was
Fig. 4. Absence of signicant interaction of cortagine with CRF
of the
mouse brain. Cortagine (100 ng, 23 pmol) or oCRF (100 ng, 21 pmol) were
applied intraseptally 30 min before EPM. aCSF or aSvg-30 (400 ng, 110 pmol)
were administered 45 min before EPM. Time spent on the open arms (a),
number of open arm entries (b), and distance traveled (c) during the test are
depicted. Statistically signicant differences: BonferroniDunn test;
, P
0.05 vs. control (aCSFaCSF).
Fig. 5. Immobility time after cortagine application in the FST. (a) Cortagine
(300 ng, 68 pmol) or oCRF (300 ng, 64 pmol) was administered i.c.v. 30 min
before the 15-min preswim on day 1. The test swim was performed 24 h later
(day 2). (b) Mice subjected to the preswim on day 1 without injection were
injected on day 2 with the two peptides (doses as in a) and subjected to the 15
min test swim 30 min later. (c) After injection of the two peptides (doses as
above), the mice were subjected to the test swim 24 h later (day 2). On day 3,
the two peptides were injected 30 min before a retest swim. Injections are
indicated by arrows. Statistically signicant differences: BonferroniDunn
, P 0.05 vs. control (aCSF); #, P 0.05 vs. oCRF-injected group.
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0403159101 Tezval et al.
confirmed when it was injected into the lateral intermediate
septum, which contains predominantly CRF
(32) (Fig. 4). At
a dose of 21 pmol, oCRF enhanced anxiety-like behavior,
whereas cortagine did not. The data on binding and biopotency,
as well as on the modulation of anxiety-like behavior, are in
agreement with earlier pharmacological analyses indicating that
the splice variants of CRF
do not differ significantly in their
pharmacological profile (5, 19).
The enhancement of anxiety-like behavior by activation of
with cortagine and oCRF was accompanied by a large
reduction in locomotor activity. The involvement of CRF
locomotor activity has also been demonstrated with CRF
deficient mice, which exhibit hyperlocomotion in the open field
(12). However, the differential anxiogenic effects of cortagine
and oCRF after intraseptal and intraventricular injections did
not correlate with locomotion differences (Figs. 3 and 4).
Therefore, we assumed that the locomotor effect represented an
independent behavior variable. Such an assumption is consistent
with factor analyses of mouse behavior in the EPM test, where
indices of anxiety and locomotor activity were loaded on sepa-
rate factors (35).
Potential effects of cortagine and oCRF on depression-like
behaviors were investigated by using the FST, a common animal
model of depression, using the immobility time as measure of
depression-like behavior (36) (Fig. 5). Surprisingly, we found
that both cortagine and oCRF significantly decreased the im-
mobility time when applied immediately before the preswim or
the test swim session. Moreover, administration of cortagine, but
not oCRF, before the preswim session resulted in a decrease of
the immobility time during the test swim session 24 h later.
Opposite effects were expected on the basis of the reported
findings that antagonism to CRF
decreases depression-like
behavior in rodents as determined by FST (33, 34), as well as in
humans (37). It is suggested that the cortagine-induced CRF
activation decreased the depression-like behavior independently
of its possible effects on general activity. Thus, the data pre-
sented here confirm the involvement of CRF
in anxiety- and
depression-like behaviors. However, the surprising cortagine
effect combining anxiogenic and antidepressive potencies indi-
cates that CRF
-involving processes of anxiety and depression
formation are not necessarily positively correlated.
Thomas Zeyda and Milos Zarkovic are gratefully acknowledged for
helpful discussions. We thank Yu-Wen Li (Bristol-Myers Squibb) for
helping to set up autoradiography and Lars van Werven, Cathrin Hippel,
Thomas Liepold, and Bodo Zimmermann for expert technical help.
1. Spiess, J., Rivier, J., Rivier, C. & Vale, W. W. (1981) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
78, 65176521.
2. Vale, W. W., Spiess, J., Rivier, C. & Rivier, J. (1981) Science 213, 13941397.
3. Eckart, K., Jahn, O., Radulovic, J., Radulovic, M., Blank, T., Stiedl, O., Brauns,
O., Tezval, H., Zeyda, T. & Spiess, J. (2002) Recept. Channels 8, 163177.
4. Reul, J. M. & Holsboer, F. (2002) Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 2, 2333.
5. Perrin, M. H. & Vale, W. W. (1999) Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 885, 312328.
6. Behan, D. P., Heinrichs, S. C., Troncoso, J. C., Liu, X. J., Kawas, C. H., Ling,
N. & De Souza, E. B. (1995) Nature 378, 284287.
7. Karolyi, I. J., Burrows, H. L., Ramesh, T. M., Nakajima, M., Lesh, J. S., Seong,
E., Camper, S. A. & Seasholtz, A. F. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96,
8. Hillhouse, E. W., Randeva, H., Ladds, G. & Grammatopoulos, D. (2002)
Biochem. Soc. Trans. 30, 428432.
9. Lovenberg, T. W., Chalmers, D. T., Liu, C. & De Souza, E. B. (1995)
Endocrinology 136, 41394142.
10. Bale, T. L., Contarino, A., Smith, G. W., Chan, R., Gold, L. H., Sawchenko,
P. E., Koob, G. F., Vale, W. W. & Lee, K. F. (2000) Nat. Genet. 24, 410414.
11. Smith, G. W., Aubry, J. M., Dellu, F., Contarino, A., Bilezikjian, L. M., Gold,
L. H., Chen, R., Marchuk, Y., Hauser, C., Bentley, C. A., et al. (1998) Neuron
20, 10931102.
12. Timpl, P., Spanagel, R., Sillaber, I., Kresse, A., Reul, J., Stalla, G. K., Blanquet,
V., Steckler, T., Holsboer, F. & Wurst, W. (1998) Nat. Genet. 19, 162166.
13. Kishimoto, T., Radulovic, J., Radulovic, M., Lin, C. R., Schrick, C., Hoosh-
mand, F., Hermanson, O., Rosenfeld, M. G. & Spiess, J. (2000) Nat. Genet. 24,
14. Radulovic, J., Ru¨hmann, A., Liepold, T. & Spiess, J. (1999) J. Neurosci. 19,
15. Koob, G. F. (1999) Biol. Psychiatry 46, 11671180.
16. Vaughan, J., Donaldson, C., Bittencourt, J., Perrin, M. H., Lewis, K., Sutton,
S., Chan, R., Turnbull, A. V., Lovejoy, D., Rivier, C., et al. (1995) Nature 378,
17. Reyes, T. M., Lewis, K., Perrin, M. H., Kunitake, K. S., Vaughan, J., Arias,
C. A., Hogenesch, J. B., Gulyas, J., Rivier, J., Vale, W. W. & Sawchenko, P. E.
(2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 28432848.
18. Hsu, S. Y. & Hsueh, A. J. W. (2001) Nat. Med. 7, 605611.
19. Lewis, K., Li, C., Perrin, M. H., Blount, A., Kunitake, K., Donaldson, C.,
Vaughan, J., Reyes, T. M., Gulyas, J., Fischer, W., et al. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 98, 75707575.
20. Behan, D. P., Grigoriadis, D. E., Lovenberg, T., Chalmers, D., Heinrichs, S.,
Liaw, C. & De Souza, E. B. (1996) Mol. Psychiatry 1, 265277.
21. Eckart, K., Jahn, O., Radulovic, J., Tezval, H., van Werven, L. & Spiess, J.
(2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 1114211147.
22. Ru¨hmann, A., Bonk, I., Lin, C. J. R., Rosenfeld, M. G. & Spiess, J. (1998) Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 1526415269.
23. Jahn, O., Eckart, K., Sydow, S., Hofmann, B. A. & Spiess, J. (2001) Peptides
(Tarrytown, NY) 22, 4756.
24. Hofmann, B. A., Sydow, S., Jahn, O., van Werven, L., Liepold, T., Eckart, K.
& Spiess, J. (2001) Protein Sci. 10, 20502062.
25. Sydow, S., Radulovic, J., Dautzenberg, F. M. & Spiess, J. (1997) Mol. Brain Res.
52, 182193.
26. Radulovic, J., Kammermeier, J. & Spiess, J. (1998) Behav. Brain Res. 95,
27. Montecucchi, P. & Henschen, A. (1981) Int. J. Pept. Protein Res. 18, 113120.
28. Beyermann, M., Rothemund, S., Heinrich, N., Fechner, K., Furkert, J., Dathe,
M., Winter, R., Krause, E. & Bienert, M. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 57025709.
29. Saido, T. C., Iwatsubo, T., Mann, D. M. A., Shimada, H., Ihara, Y. &
Kawashima, S. (1995) Neuron 14, 457466.
30. Brauns, O., Brauns, S., Zimmermann, B., Jahn, O. & Spiess, J. (2002) Peptides
(Tarrytown, NY) 23, 881888.
31. Dunn, A. J. & Berridge, C. W. (1990) Brain Res. Rev. 15, 71100.
32. Chalmers, D. T., Lovenberg, T. W. & De Souza, E. B. (1995) J. Neurosci. 15,
33. Griebel, G., Simiand, J., Steinberg, R., Jung, M., Gully, D., Roger, P., Geslin,
M., Scatton, B., Maffrand, J. P. & Soubrie, P. (2002) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.
301, 333345.
34. Bale, T. L. & Vale, W. W. (2003) J. Neurosci. 23, 52955301.
35. Lister, R. G. (1987) Psychopharmacology (Berlin) 92, 180185.
36. Porsolt, R. D., Le Pichon, M. & Jalfre, M. (1977) Nature 266, 730732.
37. Zobel, A. W., Nickel, T., Kunzel, H. E., Ackl, N., Sonntag, A., Ising, M. &
Holsboer, F. (2000) J. Psychiatr. Res. 34, 171181.
Tezval et al. PNAS
June 22, 2004
vol. 101
no. 25
... The 13 genes extracted in mice 12 weeks of age were separated into depression-inducing and depression-suppressing genes based on previous studies (19)(20)(21). Among these 13 genes, Fgfr1, Ptpn1 and Ucn3 may be associated with the development of MDD (depression-inducing), whereas the other 10 genes may be depression-suppressing genes in MDD. ...
... In contrast to these three genes, the other 10 genes identified may have the opposite effect on depression, according to previous findings (19,20,30). For example, upregulated Aqp4 expression in the prefrontal cortex was associated with MDD in patients. ...
Interleukin (IL)-18 is an interferon γ-inducing inflammatory cytokine associated with function of the immune system and other physiological functions. IL-18-deficient (Il18-/-) mice exhibit obesity, dyslipidemia, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and depressive-like behavioral changes. Therefore, IL-18 has a number of important roles associated with immunity, energy homeostasis and psychiatric conditions. In the present study, gene expression in the brains of Il18-/- mice was analyzed to identify genes associated with the depressive-like behaviors and other impairments displayed by Il18-/- mice. Using whole genome microarray analysis, gene expression patterns in the brains of Il18+/+ and Il18-/- mice at 6 and 12 weeks of age were examined and compared. Subsequently, genes were categorized using Ingenuity® Pathway Analysis (IPA). At 12 weeks of age, 2,805 genes were identified using microarray analysis. Genes related to 'Major depression' and 'Depressive disorders' were identified by IPA core analysis, and 13 genes associated with depression were isolated. Among these genes, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (Fgfr1); protein tyrosine phosphatase, non-receptor type 1 (Ptpn1); and urocortin 3 (Ucn3) were classed as depression-inducing and the other genes were considered depression-suppressing genes. Subsequently, the interactions between the microarray results at 6 weeks of age and the above three depression-inducing genes were analyzed to search for effector genes of depression at 12 weeks of age. This analysis identified cyclin D1 (Ccnd1) and NADPH oxidase 4 (Nox4). The microarray analysis results were correlated with the results of reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). Overall, the results suggest that Fgfr1, Ptpn1 and Ucn3 may be involved in depression-like changes and Ccnd1 and Nox4 regulate these three genes in IL-18-deficient mice.
... Indeed, CRH receptor type 1 antagonists have been proven to diminish depressive symptoms with similar efficacy as paroxetine (Holsboer and Ising 2008). In fact, the central application of CRH or CRH receptor type 1 and the overexpression of CRH in the CNS result in a decrease in floating time in the FST (Butler et al. 1990; van Gaalen et al. 2002;Tezval et al. 2004;Lu et al. 2008). Should this be interpreted as an antidepressant response although previous work has clearly demonstrated that high levels of CRH are rather pro-depressive? ...
... It is imperative to take into account the complete picture: the selective perception of some results and ignorance of others will not be productive. One example is the somewhat ignored contrary outcomes of behaviors in the forced swim test: some CRF overexpressing mouse lines show increased floating interpreted as behavioral despair (321), but several others show no effect (215) or even decreased floating (384,628), which is in agreement with the effects observed following central application of the CRFR1-specific agonist cortagine (602). The latter would surprisingly suggest that a CRFR1 agonist has relevant antidepressant potential. ...
The physiological stress response is responsible for the maintenance of homeostasis in the presence of real or perceived challenges. In this function, the brain activates adaptive responses that involve numerous neural circuits and effector molecules to adapt to the current and future demands. A maladaptive stress response has been linked to the etiology of a variety of disorders, such as anxiety and mood disorders, eating disorders, and the metabolic syndrome. The neuropeptide corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) and its relatives, the urocortins 1-3, in concert with their receptors (CRFR1, CRFR2), have emerged as central components of the physiological stress response. This central peptidergic system impinges on a broad spectrum of physiological processes that are the basis for successful adaptation and concomitantly integrate autonomic, neuroendocrine, and behavioral stress responses. This review focuses on the physiology of CRF-related peptides and their cognate receptors with the aim of providing a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the field. We describe the major molecular features covering aspects of gene expression and regulation, structural properties, and molecular interactions, as well as mechanisms of signal transduction and their surveillance. In addition, we discuss the large body of published experimental studies focusing on state-of-the-art genetic approaches with high temporal and spatial precision, which collectively aimed to dissect the contribution of CRF-related ligands and receptors to different levels of the stress response. We discuss the controversies in the field and unravel knowledge gaps that might pave the way for future research directions and open up novel opportunities for therapeutic intervention.
... Pharmacological studies using peripheral administration of peptide agonists selective for CRF 1 receptor (cortagine and stressin 1 -A) (57,67) or CRF 2 receptor (urocortin 2) (55), as well as CRF antagonists (astressin) (9), established that CRF 1 receptor signaling mediates the stimulatory actions of CRF and urocortin 1 on colonic motility in vivo and in vitro and the induction of diarrhea in rodents (33,40,41,48,74). By contrast, the activation of CRF 2 receptor has opposite effects and counteracts the stimulation of the colon induced by peripheral CRF 1 receptor agonists (15,48). ...
Full-text available
We investigated whether vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) and/or prostaglandins contribute to peripheral corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF)-induced CRF1 receptor mediated stimulation of colonic motor function and diarrhea in rats. The VIP antagonist, [4Cl-D-Phe6, Leu17]VIP injected intraperitoneally (ip) completely prevented CRF (10 µg/kg, ip)-induced fecal output and diarrhea occurring within the first hour post injection whereas pretreatment with the prostaglandin synthesis inhibitor, indomethacin had no effect. In submucosal plexus neurons, CRF induced significant c-Fos expression most prominently in the terminal ileum compared to duodenum and jejunum while no c-Fos was observed in the proximal colon. c-Fos expression in ileal submucosal was co-localized in 93.4% of VIP positive neurons and 31.1% of non-VIP labeled neurons. CRF1 receptor immunoreactivity was found on the VIP neurons. In myenteric neurons, CRF induced only a few c-Fos positive neurons in the ileum and a robust expression in the proximal colon (17.5{plus minus}2.4 vs. 0.4{plus minus}0.3 cells/ganglion in vehicle). The VIP antagonist prevented ip CRF-induced c-Fos induction in the ileal submucosal plexus and proximal colon myenteric plexus. At 60 min post injection, CRF decreased VIP levels in the terminal ileum compared with saline (0.8{plus minus}0.3 vs 2.5{plus minus}0.7 ng/g) whereas VIP mRNA level detected by qPCR was not changed. These data indicate that ip CRF activates intestinal submucosal VIP neurons most prominently in the ileum and myenteric neurons in the colon. It also implicates VIP signaling as part of underlying mechanisms driving the acute colonic secretomotor response to a peripheral injection of CRF whereas prostaglandins do not play a role.
... Peripheral administration of CRF-or Ucn 1-induced the activation of CRF-R1 signaling mediates the acceleration of colonic transit and induction of watery diarrhea as shown by the use of selective CRF agonists and receptor antagonists. The selective CRF-R1 peptide agonists, cortagine, or stressin 1 [238,239] injected IP stimulate colonic contractions distal colonic transit, defecation with a peak response within 30 min post injection, and a rapid onset diarrhea in rodents [154,219,222,229,231,235,238,240]. Contrasting, the IP or IV injection of Ucn 2 or Ucn 3 has no effect on basal dis-tal colonic transit, colonic contractions and defecation [222,229,235,241]. ...
Background: Corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) pathways coordinate behavioral, endocrine, autonomic and visceral responses to stress. Convergent anatomical, molecular, pharmacological and functional experimental evidence supports a key role of brain CRF receptor (CRF-R) signaling in stress-related alterations of gastrointestinal functions. These include the inhibition of gastric acid secretion and gastric-small intestinal transit, stimulation of colonic enteric nervous system and secretorymotor function, increase intestinal permeability, and visceral hypersensitivity. Brain sites of CRF actions to alter gut motility encompass the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus, locus coeruleus complex and the dorsal motor nucleus while those modulating visceral pain are localized in the hippocampus and central amygdala. Brain CRF actions are mediated through the autonomic nervous system (decreased gastric vagal and increased sacral parasympathetic and sympathetic activities). The activation of brain CRF-R2 subtype inhibits gastric motor function while CRF-R1 stimulates colonic secretomotor function and induces visceral hypersensitivity. CRF signaling is also located within the gut where CRF-R1 activates colonic myenteric neurons, mucosal cells secreting serotonin, mucus, prostaglandin E2, induces mast cell degranulation, enhances mucosal permeability and propulsive motor functions and induces visceral hyperalgesia in animals and humans. CRF-R1 antagonists prevent CRF- and stressrelated gut alterations in rodents while not influencing basal state. Discussion: These preclinical studies contrast with the limited clinical positive outcome of CRF-R1 antagonists to alleviate stress-sensitive functional bowel diseases such as irritable bowel syndrome. Conclusion: The translational potential of CRF-R1 antagonists in gut diseases will require additional studies directed to novel anti-CRF therapies and the neurobiology of brain-gut interactions under chronic stress.
... Similar findings were reported in mice deficient in phosphodiesterase 4 B, an enzyme that catalyzes hydrolysis of cyclic AMP [24], which is a potential downstream signaling molecule of class 3 Semaphorin [2]. It is reported that treatment of a specific agonist of corticotropin-releasing factor receptor subtype 1, stimulating the release of cyclic AMP, induced decrease in immobility in the forced swim test and anxiogenic-like effects in mice [25]. Since Sema3F KO mice exhibited abnormal anxiety-related behavior in some of tests, the 'antidepressant-like' effect observed in the forced swim test might be resulted from anxiety-related struggling, escape behavior, or heightened agitation in stressful situation, resulting in the decreased immobility. ...
Full-text available
Semaphorin 3 F (Sema3F) is a secreted type of the Semaphorin family of axon guidance molecules. Sema3F and its receptor neuropilin-2 (Npn-2) are expressed in a mutually exclusive manner in the embryonic mouse brain regions including olfactory bulb, hippocampus, and cerebral cortex. Sema3F is thought to have physiological functions in the formation of neuronal circuitry and its refinement. However, functional roles of Sema3F in the brain remain to be clarified. Here, we examined behavioral effects of Sema3F deficiency through a comprehensive behavioral test battery in Sema3F knockout (KO) male mice to understand the possible functions of Sema3F in the brain. Male Sema3F KO and wild-type (WT) control mice were subjected to a battery of behavioral tests, including neurological screen, rotarod, hot plate, prepulse inhibition, light/dark transition, open field, elevated plus maze, social interaction, Porsolt forced swim, tail suspension, Barnes maze, and fear conditioning tests. In the open field test, Sema3F KO mice traveled shorter distance and spent less time in the center of the field than WT controls during the early testing period. In the light/dark transition test, Sema3F KO mice also exhibited decreased distance traveled, fewer number of transitions, and longer latency to enter the light chamber compared with WT mice. In addition, Sema3F KO mice traveled shorter distance than WT mice in the elevated plus maze test, although there were no differences between genotypes in open arm entries and time spent in open arms. Similarly, Sema3F KO mice showed decreased distance traveled in the social interaction test. Sema3F KO mice displayed reduced immobility in the Porsolt forced swim test whereas there was no difference in immobility between genotypes in the tail suspension test. In the fear conditioning test, Sema3F KO mice exhibited increased freezing behavior when exposed to a conditioning context and an altered context in absence of a conditioned stimulus. In the tests for assessing motor function, pain sensitivity, startle response to an acoustic stimulus, sensorimotor gating, or spatial reference memory, there were no significant behavioral differences between Sema3F KO and WT mice. These results suggest that Sema3F deficiency induces decreased locomotor activity and possibly abnormal anxiety-related behaviors and also enhances contextual memory and generalized fear in mice. Thus, our findings suggest that Sema3F plays important roles in the development of neuronal circuitry underlying the regulation of some aspects of anxiety and fear responses.
Full-text available
When injected via the intracerebroventricular route, corticosterone-releasing hormone (CRH) reduced exploration in the elevated plus-maze, the center region of the open-field, and the large chamber in the defensive withdrawal test. The anxiogenic action of CRH in the elevated plus-maze also occurred when infused in the basolateral amygdala, ventral hippocampus, lateral septum, bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, nucleus accumbens, periaqueductal grey, and medial frontal cortex. The anxiogenic action of CRH in the defensive withdrawal test was reproduced when injected in the locus coeruleus, while the amygdala, hippocampus, lateral septum, nucleus accumbens, and lateral globus pallidus contribute to center zone exploration in the open-field. In addition to elevated plus-maze and open-field tests, the amygdala appears as a target region for CRH-mediated anxiety in the elevated T-maze. Thus, the amygdala is the principal brain region identified with these three tests, and further research must identify the neural circuits underlying this form of anxiety.
The amygdala (Amy) is an important center that processes threatening stimuli. Among the neurotransmitters implicated in the control of emotional states, the corticotrophin releasing factor (CRF) is an important modulator, acting at CRF1 and CRF2 receptors. Few studies have investigated the role of CRF and its receptors in the Amy on anxiety in mice. Here, we investigated the effects of intra-Amy (aimed at the basolateral nucleus) injections of CRF (37.5 and 75pmol/0.1μl), urocortin 3 (UCn3, a selective CRF2 agonist; 4, 8, 16 or 24pmol/0.1μl), CP376395 (a selective CRF1 antagonist; 0.375, 0.75 or 1.5nmol/0.1μl), antisauvagine-30 (ASV-30, a selective CRF2 antagonist; 1 or 3nmol/0.1μl) on the behavior of mice exposed to the elevated plus maze (EPM). Both spatiotemporal (e.g., percentage of open-arm entries and percentage of open-arm time; %OE and %OT) and complementary [e.g., frequency of protected and unprotected stretched attend postures (pSAP and uSAP) and head dips (pHD and uHD); frequency and time spent on open arm end exploration (OAEE)] measures were recorded during a 5-min test in the EPM. While intra-Amy injections of CRF decreased %OE, %OT and OAEE, suggesting an anxiogenic-like action, UCn3 (all doses) did not change any behavior. In contrast, injections of CP376395 (0.75nmol) produced an anxiolytic-like effect, by increasing %OT and OAEE and decreasing pSAP and pHD. Neither spatiotemporal nor complementary measures were changed by intra-Amy ASV-30. These results suggest that CRF plays a marked anxiogenic role at CRF1 receptors in the amygdala of mice exposed to the EPM.
Full-text available
The conformational freedom of single-chain peptide hormones, such as the 41-amino acid hormone corticotropin releasing factor (CRF), is a major obstacle to the determination of their biologically relevant conformation, and thus hampers insights into the mechanism of ligand-receptor interaction. Since N- and C-terminal truncations of CRF lead to loss of biological activity, it has been thought that almost the entire peptide is essential for receptor activation. Here we show the existence of two segregated receptor binding sites at the N and C termini of CRF, connection of which is essential for receptor binding and activation. Connection of the two binding sites by highly flexible ε-aminocaproic acid residues resulted in CRF analogues that remained full, although weak agonists (EC50: 100–300 nm) independent of linker length. Connection of the two sites by an appropriate helical peptide led to a very potent analogue, which adopted, in contrast to CRF itself, a stable, monomer conformation in aqueous solution. Analogues in which the two sites were connected by helical linkers of different lengths were potent agonists; their significantly different biopotencies (EC50: 0.6–50 nm), however, suggest the relative orientation between the two binding sites rather than the maintenance of a distinct distance between them to be essential for a high potency.
Full-text available
CORTICOTROPIN-RELEASING factor (CRF), a peptide first isolated from mammalian brain1, is critical in the regulation of the pituitary–adrenal axis, and in complementary stress-related endocrine, autonomic and behavioural responses2. Fish urotensin I and amphibian sauvagine were considered to be homologues3 of CRF until peptides even more closely related to CRF were identified in these same vertebrate classes4,5. We have characterized another mammalian member of the CRF family and have localized its urotensin-like immunoreactivity to, and cloned related complementary DNAs from, a discrete rat midbrain region. The deduced protein encodes a peptide that we name urocortin, which is related to urotensin (63% sequence identity) and CRF (45% sequence identity). Synthetic urocortin evokes secretion of adrenocortico-tropic hormone (ACTH) both in vitro and in vivo and binds and activates transfected type-1 CRF receptors6–9, the subtype expressed by pituitary corticotropes. The coincidence of urotensin-like immunoreactivity with type-2 CRF receptors10–13 in brain, and our observation that urocortin is more potent than CRF at binding and activating type-2 CRF receptors, as well as at inducing c-Fos (an index of cellular activation) in regions enriched in type-2 CRF receptors, indicate that this new peptide could be an endogenous ligand for type-2 CRF receptors.
We have recently described the cloning and characterization of a novel corticotropin-releasing factor receptor subtype (CRF2) from rat brain that exists in two alternatively spliced forms, CRF2 alpha and CRF2 beta. These forms differ in their N-terminal coding sequence which results in the production of two distinct receptors of 411 and 431 amino acids, respectively. To assess whether these two forms might represent distinct targets for CRF action, RNase protection and in situ hybridization studies were performed using specific N-terminal cRNA probes. The results showed a differential distribution of the mRNAs for these two receptor forms in the rat. The mRNA for CRF2 alpha is found almost exclusively in the brain, particularly in the hypothalamus, lateral septum, and olfactory bulb, whereas the mRNA for CRF2 beta appears to be both in the brain and in the periphery, with the greatest abundance in the heart and skeletal muscle. Thus, the data suggest that these alternatively spliced forms of the CRF2 receptor may represent functionally distinct CRF receptors. In addition, it highlights the importance of probe specificity for in situ hybridization studies.
A peptide with high potency and intrinsic activity for stimulating the secretion of corticotropin-like and β -endorphin-like immunoactivities by cultured anterior pituitary cells has been purified from ovine hypothalamic extracts. The primary structure of this 41-residue corticotropin- and β -endorphin-releasing factor has been determined to be: H-Ser-Gln-Glu-Pro-Pro-Ile-Ser-Leu-Asp-Leu-Thr-Phe-His-Leu-Leu-Arg-Glu- Val-Leu-Glu-Met-Thr-Lys-Ala-Asp-Gln-Leu-Ala-Gln-Gln-Ala-His-Ser-Asn-Arg- Lys-Leu-Leu-Asp-Ile-Ala-NH2 The synthetic peptide is active in vitro and in vivo.
Corticotropin-releasing hormone (Crh) is a critical coordinator of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. In response to stress, Crh released from the paraventricular nucleus (PVN) of the hypothalamus activates Crh receptors on anterior pituitary corticotropes, resulting in release of adrenocorticotropic hormone (Acth) into the bloodstream. Acth in turn activates Acth receptors in the adrenal cortex to increase synthesis and release of glucocorticoids1. The receptors for Crh, Crhr1 and Crhr2, are found throughout the central nervous system and periphery. Crh has a higher affinity for Crhr1 than for Crhr2, and urocortin (Ucn), a Crh-related peptide, is thought to be the endogenous ligand for Crhr2 because it binds with almost 40-fold higher affinity than does Crh (ref. 2). Crhr1 and Crhr2 share approximately 71% amino acid sequence similarity and are distinct in their localization within the brain and peripheral tissues3, 4, 5, 6. We generated mice deficient for Crhr2 to determine the physiological role of this receptor. Crhr2-mutant mice are hypersensitive to stress and display increased anxiety-like behaviour. Mutant mice have normal basal feeding and weight gain, but decreased food intake following food deprivation. Intravenous Ucn produces no effect on mean arterial pressure in the mutant mice.
Rat corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1 (rCRFR1) was produced either in transfected HEK 293 cells as a complex glycosylated protein or in the presence of the mannosidase I inhibitor kifunensine as a high mannose glycosylated protein. The altered glycosylation did not influence the biological function of rCRFR1 as demonstrated by competitive binding of rat urocortin (rUcn) or human/rat corticotropin-releasing factor (h/rCRF) and agonist-induced cAMP accumulation. The low production rate of the N-terminal domain of rCRFR1 (rCRFR1-NT) by transfected HEK 293 cells, was increased by a factor of 100 in the presence of kifunensine. The product, rCRFR1-NT-Kif, bound rUcn specifically (KD = 27 nM) and astressin (KI = 60 nM). This affinity was 10-fold lower than the affinity of full length rCRFR1. However, it was sufficiently high for rCRFR1-NT-Kif to serve as a model for the N-terminal domain of rCRFR1. With protein fragmentation, Edman degradation, and mass spectrometric analysis, evidence was found for the signal peptide cleavage site C-terminally to Thr23 and three disulfide bridges between precursor residues 30 and 54, 44 and 87, and 68 and 102. Of all putative N-glycosylation sites in positions 32, 38, 45, 78, 90, and 98, all Asn residues except for Asn32 were glycosylated to a significant extent. No O-glycosylation was observed.
To investigate whether an elevated plus-maze consisting of two open and two closed arms could be used as a model of anxiety in the mouse, NIH Swiss mice were tested in the apparatus immediately after a holeboard test. Factor analysis of data from undrugged animals tested in the holeboard and plus-maze yielded three orthogonal factors interpreted as assessing anxiety, directed exploration and locomotion. Anxiolytic drugs (chlordiazepoxide, sodium pentobarbital and ethanol) increased the proportion of time spent on the open arms, and anxiogenic drugs (FG 7142, caffeine and picrotoxin) reduced this measure. Amphetamine and imipramine failed to alter the indices of anxiety. The anxiolytic effect of chlordiazepoxide was reduced in mice that had previously experienced the plus-maze in an undrugged state. Testing animals in the holeboard immediately before the plus-maze test significantly elevated both the percentage of time spent on the open arms and the total number of arm entries, but did not affect the behavioral response to chlordiazepoxide. The plus-maze appears to be a useful test with which to investigate both anxiolytic and anxiogenic agents.
A MAJOR problem in the search for new antidepressant drugs is the lack of animal models which both resemble depressive illness and are selectively sensitive to clinically effective antidepressant treatments. We have been working on a new behavioural model in the rat which attempts to meet these two requirements. The method is based on the observation that a rat, when forced to swim in a situation from which there is no escape, will, after an initial period of vigorous activity, eventually cease to move altogether making only those movements necessary to keep its head above water. We think that this characteristic and readily identifiable behavioural immobility indicates a state of despair in which the rat has learned that escape is impossible and resigns itself to the experimental conditions. This hypothesis receives support from results presented below which indicate that immobility is reduced by different treatments known to be therapeutic in depression including three drugs, iprindole, mianserin and viloxazine which although clinically active1-3 show little or no `antidepressant' activity in the usual animal tests4-6.