Channelpedia

PubMed 26014109


Referenced in: none

Automatically associated channels: TASK1



Title: Opposing effects of glutamatergic and GABAergic pharmacological manipulations on a visual perception task with relevance to schizophrenia.

Authors: John C Talpos, John Riordan, Joseph Olley, Jason Waddell, Thomas Steckler

Journal, date & volume: Psychopharmacology (Berl.), 2015 Nov , 232, 3967-76

PubMed link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26014109


Abstract
Numerous psychiatric disorders and neurodegenerative diseases have been associated with differences in visual perception, and it has been proposed that the treatment of these differences may represent a novel means to treat disorders like schizophrenia. Unfortunately, few methods exist to study visual perception in pre-clinical species.The purpose of the present study was to adapt a task of visual integration by proximity with relevance to schizophrenia to a rodent touchscreen environment to determine the effects of glutamatergic and GABAergic compounds. In this way, we could evaluate the effects of common models of cognitive impairment, as well as the effects of net excitation versus inhibition, on a task of visual integration.Rats were trained to perform a visual discrimination where the stimuli were composed of rows of dots differing only in there horizontal and vertical proximity. Once stable performance had been achieved, animals were tested under the influence of glutamatergic or GABAergic drugs (ketamine, MK-801, PCP, memantine, chlordiazepoxide, or diazepam) while attempting to perform a visual discrimination with altered stimuli.Ketamine appeared to impair perceptual grouping in this paradigm, while the GABA agonist chlordiazepoxide enhanced grouping even in the presence of non-selective effects.In general, these findings support the theory that NMDA antagonists may disrupt visual grouping by proximity and highlight a potential beneficial effect of enhanced GABA activity in perception. However, additional research will be required to confirm the stimulus selectivity of this effect, and the clinical significance of this approach.