help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. S.
Endocrinology Vol. 140, No. 1 118-123
Copyright © 1999 by The Endocrine Society

ARTICLES

Neuropeptide Y and Tuberoinfundibular Dopamine Activities Are Altered during Lactation: Role of Prolactin1

Chien Li, Peilin Chen and M. Susan Smith

Division of Neuroscience, Oregon Regional Primate Research Center, Beaverton, Oregon 97006; and the Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, Oregon 97201-3098

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. M. Susan Smith, Division of Neuroscience, Oregon Regional Primate Research Center, 505 NW 185th Avenue, Beaverton, Oregon 97006. E-mail: smithsu{at}ohsu.edu


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
During lactation the suckling stimulus increases the activity of two populations of neuropeptide Y (NPY) neurons in the hypothalamus, the caudal portion of the arcuate nucleus (ARH) and the dorsomedial hypothalamus (DMH), and suppresses the activity of TIDA neurons in the ARH. In the present study, an acute resuckling model was used to examine the role of suckling-induced hyperprolactinemia in modulating the activity of these systems. Lactating rats were deprived of their eight-pup litters on day 9 postpartum, and 48 h later, the animals served either as nonsuckled controls (0 pups) or were suckled for 24 h. In addition, some of the resuckled animals received two sc injections of bromocriptine (0.5 mg/rat·injection), a dopamine D2 agonist, to inhibit suckling-induced PRL secretion. In situ hybridization was performed for rat NPY messenger RNA (mRNA) and tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) mRNA to provide an index for NPY and TIDA neuronal activities, respectively. Resuckling for 24 h induced a significant increase in NPY mRNA levels in the caudal portion of the ARH and in the DMH. Bromocriptine treatment did not alter the increase in NPY mRNA levels in the ARH, whereas the treatment greatly attenuated the increase in NPY mRNA in the DMH. TH mRNA levels in the rostral ARH area returned to basal levels in the nonsuckled control animals, and 24 h of resuckling significantly suppressed TH mRNA expression in this area. Bromocriptine treatment caused a significant increase in TH mRNA levels compared with those in the eight-pup suckled group. Thus, the results from the present study demonstrate that the suckling stimulus activated the two populations of NPY neurons and suppressed TIDA activity. Suckling-induced hyperprolactinemia did not participate in the increase in ARH NPY activity, whereas it played a major stimulatory role in suckling-induced activation of NPY neurons in the DMH and an inhibitory role in suckling-induced suppression of TIDA activity. The increase in TIDA activity after bromocriptine treatment was unexpected and suggests that the role of PRL in the regulation of TIDA activity is significantly altered during lactation.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
THE ACTIVITIES of several hypothalamic neuronal systems are altered during lactation. These alterations may be important in mediating some of the physiological adaptations occurring during lactation, such as suppression of ovarian cyclicity, increased food intake, and suckling-induced milk production.

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) neuronal activity has been shown to be greatly increased in two discrete areas in the hypothalamus during lactation: the caudal portion of the arcuate nucleus (ARH) and the dorsomedial nucleus of the hypothalamus (DMH) (1, 2). It has been suggested that the increased NPY activity in the caudal portion of the ARH may be important in mediating the increased food intake and the suppression of LH secretion associated with lactation (3, 4, 5, 6). Currently, the functional role of the increased NPY in the DMH is still unknown.

In contrast, the activity of the tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic (TIDA) system in the ARH is greatly suppressed during lactation. Dopamine (DA) production as well as the expression of tyrosine hydroxylase (TH), the rate-limiting enzyme in the DA biosynthetic pathway, are significantly reduced (7, 8). Under normal conditions, DA produced from the TIDA system is believed to be the main PRL-inhibiting factor that is tonically released to inhibit PRL secretion from lactotrophs in the anterior pituitary (for reviews, see Refs. 9, 10). In addition, the activity of the TIDA neurons is regulated by PRL, such that elevated PRL increases the activity of these neurons and the secretion of DA into the median eminence (for reviews, see Ref. 11). During lactation, however, this feedback regulation of PRL is not operative, because elevated PRL levels are not associated with increased TIDA activity. This apparent dissociation between TIDA activity and PRL secretion may be one of the mechanisms by which high levels of PRL are sustained during lactation.

Currently, the mechanisms by which the activities of these neuronal systems are altered during lactation are not completely understood. It has been suggested that the suckling stimulus is important in triggering these changes (2, 12). Several factors associated with the suckling stimulus, such as the elevated levels of PRL and neural impulses, are possible candidates for mediating the alterations in NPY and the TIDA activities. Thus, in the present study, bromocriptine, a DA D2 receptor agonist, was used to inhibit suckling-induced PRL to characterize its role in modulating NPY and TIDA neuronal activities during lactation.


   Materials and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Animals
Day 18–19 pregnant Sprague-Dawley rats (B & K Universal, Inc., Kent, WA) were housed individually and were maintained under a 12-h light, 12-h dark cycle (lights on at 0700 h) and constant temperature (23 ± 2 C). Food and water were provided ad libitum. The pregnant rats were checked for the birth of the pups every morning; the day of delivery was considered day 0 postpartum. All animal procedures were approved by the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center institutional animal care and use committee.

Experimental design
An acute suckling paradigm, previously described (2), was used in the present study to control the onset of the suckling stimulus more precisely. Briefly, lactating animals had their litters adjusted to eight pups on day 2 postpartum, and the pups remained with their mothers until day 9. At that time, the eight-pup litters were removed from the females. On day 11, the animals were randomly divided into the following three groups: 1) nonsuckled controls, animals received two sc vehicle injections (0 pups control; n = 7); 2) eight pups suckling for 24 h, animals received two vehicle injections (8 pups; n = 8); and 3) eight pups suckling for 24 h, animals received two bromocriptine injections (0.5 mg/rat·injection; 8 pups+B; n = 8). Resuckling for 24 h was chosen because 24 h of the suckling stimulus, after 48 h of pup deprivation, was necessary to consistently observe significant changes in NPY gene expression in the ARH (2).

Bromocriptine (Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp., East Hanover, NJ) was dissolved in peanut oil containing 25% alcohol (5 mg/ml). Bromocriptine or vehicle was administered sc 3 h before returning litters to the dams on day 11 postpartum; a second injection was given 12 h after returning the pups. The dose of bromocriptine used in the present study has been shown previously to have no direct effect in the brain (13, 14, 15).

After 24 h of suckling, the animals were killed by decapitation, and the brains were quickly removed, frozen on dry ice, and stored at -80 C. Coronal brain sections (20 µm) were collected through the ARH in a one in three series. The slides were stored at -80 C until used for in situ hybridization. Trunk blood was also collected and was assayed for rat PRL by RIA. The assay was performed by Dr. Marc Freeman at Florida State University according to methods previously described (16).

In situ hybridization
In the present study, quantitative in situ hybridization was used to measure the messenger RNA (mRNA) levels for TH and NPY, respectively, to serve as an indirect measure of neuronal activity. The activity of central neurons has been shown to be related to the cellular levels of mRNA encoding their rate-limiting enzyme or in peptidergic neurons to the levels of prepropeptide mRNA (17, 18). Gene expression of TH and NPY in TIDA and NPY neurons, respectively, exhibits a tight parallel relationship with neuronal activity (2, 8, 19, 20).

NPY and TH cRNA probe synthesis, the specificity of the cRNA probe, and procedures for in situ hybridization have been described previously (1, 2, 8). Briefly, the NPY cRNA probe was transcribed from a 511-bp complementary DNA (cDNA) in which 21% of the UTP was 35S labeled (DuPont-New England Nuclear, Boston, MA). The TH cRNA probe was transcribed from a 300-bp cDNA using 50% 35S-labeled UTP. The specific activity for both probes ranged from 1–3 x 108 dpm/µg. The saturating concentration for both probes used in the assay was 0.3 µg/ml·kb.

The brain sections were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and treated with a fresh solution containing 0.25% acetic anhydride in 0.1 M triethanolamine (pH 8.0), followed by a rinse in 2 x SSC (standard saline citrate), dehydrated through a graded series of alcohols, delipidated in chloroform, rehydrated through a second series of alcohols, and then air-dried. The slides were exposed to the respective cRNA probes overnight in moist chambers at 55 C. After incubation, the slides were washed in SSC that increased in stringency, in ribonuclease, and then in 0.1 x SSC at 60 C; dehydrated through a graded series of alcohols; and dried. Slides were dipped in NTB-2 emulsion (Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY), exposed for 6–7 days at 4 C, and developed. After development, the slides were stained with cresyl violet.

Data analysis
The ARH was divided into four subdivisions (ARH-A, -B, -C, and -D), as described in previous studies (1, 2), using the rat brain atlas of Paxinos and Watson (21). We have shown previously (1, 2) that the suckling stimulus only affects the NPY neurons located in the caudal portion of the ARH (ARH-C). On the other hand, even though the suckling stimulus suppresses TH gene expression throughout the entire ARH (8), TIDA neurons are most numerous in the rostral portion of the ARH (ARH-A and ARH-B). Thus, the ARH-C-containing sections were used for the NPY study, and the brain sections containing ARH-A and ARH-B were used for the TH study. As the suckling-induced NPY expressing neurons in the DMH occupied the same plane as ARH-C (2), the tissue sections covering the ARH-C subdivision were also used to analyze NPY gene expression in the DMH.

The coronal brain sections were anatomically matched across animals from all groups. The hybridization signals were quantitated using the HARMONY image analysis system by VIDEK (Rochester, NY). The system identified silver grains by the brightness of the image. An estimate for silver grains over the entire ARH (for ARH-NPY and TH) or the entire DMH (for DMH-NPY) on each tissue section was given as the area occupied by silver grains within the marked area.

Statistical analysis
The data were expressed as the area occupied by grains per section. The mean area occupied by grains per section was determined for each animal. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM. Differences between groups were evaluated using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Scheffe’s tests. Differences were considered significant if P < 0.05.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Effects of bromocriptine treatment on PRL levels
PRL levels were significantly elevated by 24 h of suckling, whereas PRL levels remained low in nonsuckled control animals (Fig. 1Go). Bromocriptine treatment effectively blocked the PRL elevation induced by the suckling stimulus (Fig. 1Go).



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Serum PRL levels in the three treatment groups. Animals were deprived of their pups for 48 h and then were subjected to 24 h of suckling (8 pups and 8 pups+B) or remained pup deprived (0 pups control). Bromocriptine treatment (B, 0.5 mg/rat·injection, two injections) significantly suppressed suckling-induced PRL secretions. *, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 0 pups control group. {blacktriangleup}, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 8 pups group.

 
NPY gene expression in the ARH
In the ARH-C area, 24 h of suckling caused a significant increase in NPY gene expression compared with that in the nonsuckled control animals (Figs. 2Go and 3Go). In addition, there was no difference in NPY gene expression between the 8 pups and the 8 pups+B groups (Figs. 2Go and 3Go), indicating that inhibition of PRL secretion did not prevent the suckling-induced activation of NPY gene expression in ARH.



View larger version (64K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Darkfield photomicrographs from the ARH-C (top panels) and ARH-B (bottom panels) showing the silver grain clusters representing NPY mRNA (top panels) and TH mRNA (bottom panels) from the three treatment groups. Note in the top panels the marked increase in NPY silver grain expression in the dorsolateral and ventrolateral portions of the ARH-C in the suckled animals (8 pups and 8 pups+B). As shown in the lower panels, TH mRNA was markedly reduced in these groups. Scale bar = 20 µm.

 


View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. NPY mRNA levels in the ARH-C region in the three treatment groups. Acute resuckling for 24 h, after 48 h of pup deprivation, induced a significant increase in NPY mRNA levels in this region. Inhibition of PRL secretion by bromocriptine (B) did not prevent the activation of NPY neurons by the suckling stimulus. *, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 0 pups control.

 
NPY gene expression in the DMH
Suckling eight pups for 24 h induced the expression of NPY in a population of neurons located around the compact zone in the DMH (Fig. 4Go). This population of NPY neurons was not observed in the nonsuckled control group (Fig. 4Go). In the bromocriptine-treated group (Fig. 4Go), the signal appeared to be less intensive compared with that in vehicle-treated animals (Fig. 4Go). Quantitatively, the levels of NPY mRNA signal in both the 8 pups and the 8 pups+B groups were significantly higher than those in the 0 pups control group (Fig. 5Go). In addition, the NPY mRNA levels in the 8 pups group were significantly greater than those observed in the 8 pups+B group (Fig. 5Go). It should be noted that low levels of NPY mRNA signal were observed covering the compact zone of the DMH in all animals examined (Fig. 4Go), and this expression did not change in response to suckling.



View larger version (92K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. Darkfield photomicrographs of the caudal DMH area showing the expression of NPY mRNA from the three treatment groups. Acute resuckling for 24 h induced clusters of silver grains (representative clusters indicated by the arrows) scattered in the DMH of 8 pups and 8 pups+B animals. Silver grain clusters representing NPY mRNA were not found in the same area in the 0 pups control animals. The low level of signal covering the compact zone of DMH was observed in all the animals examined. Bromocriptine treatment significantly blunted NPY mRNA expression in the DMH (8 pups+B). Scale bar = 25 µm.

 


View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 5. NPY mRNA levels in the DMH area in the three treatment groups. Acute resuckling for 24 h induced a significant increase in NPY mRNA levels in this area, whereas treatment with bromocriptine (B) significantly attenuated NPY gene expression. *, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 0 pups control group. {blacktriangleup}, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 8 pups group.

 
TH gene expression in the ARH
In the ARH-A and -B areas, TH gene expression was clearly detected in animals with pups removed for 48 h (Fig. 2Go). The levels of expression were comparable to those found in normal diestrous females (8). TH gene expression in both the vehicle- and bromocriptine-treated suckled groups were significantly lower than that in the nonsuckled controls (Figs. 2Go and 6Go). In addition, TH mRNA levels in bromocriptine-treated suckled animals were significantly higher than those in the 8 pups group (Figs. 2Go and 6Go).



View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 6. TH mRNA levels in the rostral ARH (ARH-A and ARH-B) area in the three treatment groups. TH mRNA levels returned to basal levels in the 0 pups control group, whereas 24 h of suckling effectively suppressed TH gene expression (8 pups group). Treatment with bromocriptine (B) increased TH mRNA levels compared with that in the 8 pups group. *, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 0 pups control group. {blacktriangleup}, Significantly different (P < 0.05) from 8 pups group.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
During lactation, the suckling stimulus plays a key role in mediating the alterations in hypothalamic function. The present studies demonstrated that the suckling stimulus alters both NPY gene expression in the ARH and DMH and TH expression in the ARH. In addition, the results from treatment with bromocriptine indicate that suckling-induced PRL may differentially regulate the activities of different hypothalamic regions during lactation.

The results of examining ARH NPY gene expression in the present study are in agreement with those of our earlier studies (1, 2) and others (22), showing a significant increase in NPY gene expression in neurons in the caudal ARH in response to the suckling stimulus. In addition, the ineffectiveness of bromocriptine treatment in altering suckling- induced increases in ARH NPY gene expression indicates that suckling-induced hyperprolactinemia is not important in modulating ARH NPY activity. These results are in agreement with reports showing that PRL treatment does not affect ARH NPY gene expression (23), and immunoneutralization of PRL does not reduce NPY expression during lactation (22). In addition, because of the inhibition of PRL secretion, milk production in bromocriptine-treated dams would be minimal; therefore, these animals do not experience a significant change in energy balance. Thus, the activation of NPY in the ARH in the bromocriptine-treated animals occurs in the absence of a change in energy balance. These results thus suggest that the activation of NPY neurons in the ARH is mediated by incoming neural impulses activated by suckling, not by changes in energy balance.

In addition to the ARH NPY neurons, the present study also confirmed our earlier report (2) that the suckling stimulus activates a second population of NPY neurons located in the DMH. The blunted NPY expression after the inhibition of elevated PRL by bromocriptine treatment suggests that the activation of the DMH NPY neurons is, to a significant degree, mediated by PRL. The full activation of the NPY neurons is probably achieved by the combination of the suckling-induced neuronal inputs to the DMH and the hyperprolactinemia. The mechanism by which PRL modulates NPY activity in DMH is unknown. Identification of PRL receptors (PRL-R) in the brain (24, 25, 26, 27, 28) suggests that PRL may act directly in the brain to modulate NPY neruonal activity. It has been shown by immunocytochemistry (25) and receptor autoradiography (24) that PRL-R were found in the DMH, whereas in situ hybridization failed to show PRL-R-positive neurons in this area (26, 27, 28). These results suggest that PRL’s action in DMH may be presynatpic. On the other hand, PRL-R have also been found in the central nuclei of the amygdala, the medial preoptic area, the lateral septum, and the periaqueductal gray (24, 28) areas, which have been shown to be activated by the suckling stimulus during lactation (29, 30, 31, 32). The expression of PRL-R in these areas raises the possibility that PRL may modulate DMH NPY neuronal activity indirectly. Currently, there is very little known about the significance of suckling-activated DMH NPY neurons during lactation. Recently, a retrograde tracing study conducted in our laboratory demonstrated that the suckling-activated DMH NPY neurons project to the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus (33), suggesting that these NPY neurons may modulate paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus activity during lactation.

The suppression of TIDA neuronal activity during lactation has been previously reported (7, 8, 12), although the mechanism by which TIDA activity is suppressed is still not understood. The involvement of PRL in regulating the TIDA neurons during lactation has largely been dismissed, because the short loop feedback regulation, in which elevated PRL levels (34, 35, 36) are normally associated with increased TIDA activity, clearly does not exist during lactation. In addition, exogenous PRL administration failed to activate TIDA neurons during lactation (7). Recently, it was shown that inhibition of suckling-induced PRL in midlactation caused a suppression of DOPA accumulation in the median eminence (37), suggesting that PRL may play a stimulatory role in regulating TIDA activity during lactation. However, the interpretation of the results is complicated by the following concerns: 1) the suppression of DOPA could not be reversed by coadministration of PRL; and 2) the methods used for measuring TIDA activity. TIDA activity was assessed by treating the animals with a decarboxylase inhibitor, NSD 1015. After treatment, the animals were killed, and DOPA accumulation in the median eminence fragments was measured (11). However, the midbrain dopaminergic cell groups (A8, A9, and A10), other than TIDA neurons, also terminate in the median eminence (38). Therefore, the changes in DOPA may not solely reflect the activity of TIDA neurons.

In the present study, we used an acute suckling model to examine the possible role of PRL in regulating TIDA neurons. In this model, the animals were first deprived of pups for 48 h before receiving 24 h of resuckling. The period of pup separation allows the TIDA activity as well as TH gene expression to recover to basal levels (8, 20). Secondly, in situ hybridization was used so as to be able to specifically study the changes in TIDA neurons. Consistent with previous reports (8, 37), this paradigm confirmed that the acute suckling stimulus greatly inhibited TH gene expression. Surprisingly, TH mRNA levels in these neurons were partially restored when hyperprolactinemia was prevented by bromocriptine treatment. These results suggest that, at least in response to the acute effects of suckling, elevated PRL is involved in the suppression of TH gene expression and, possibly, TIDA neuronal activity. Theoretically, the inhibitory effect of PRL on TIDA neurons observed in the present study should ensure that hyperprolactinemia is maintained during lactation. More importantly, the suckling stimulus appears to be critical in changing the stimulatory effects of PRL on TIDA activity into inhibitory effects. The mechanisms by which elevated PRL negatively modulates TH gene expression are not clear. Recently, it has been shown that TIDA neurons in the ARH express PRL-R (39). This provides anatomical evidence that PRL can affect TIDA neurons directly by binding to its own receptor. On the other hand, it is also possible that PRL can modulate TH expression indirectly by acting on neurons that connect to the TIDA neurons. Anatomical studies have demonstrated the direct contact between POMC-positive neuronal terminals and TIDA cell bodies (40, 41). It has been shown that µ-opioid receptor antagonists can prevent suckling-induced suppression of TIDA activity (42). Furthermore, immunoneutralization of suckling-induced PRL causes a decrease in the number of activated ß-endorphin-positive neurons during lactation (43). Therefore, it is possible that PRL may modulate TIDA activity by acting through the POMC system in the ARH.

Anatomical and pharmacological evidence also suggests that ARH NPY can directly modulate TH gene expression and TIDA neuronal activity (44, 45, 46). Thus, upon activation by the suckling stimulus, the ARH NPY neurons may directly modulate TH expression in the TIDA neurons. The possibility that PRL may modulate TH expression through the ARH NPY neurons is ruled out by the present studies, which show that ARH NPY expression remained elevated regardless of changes in TIDA neurons that were affected by the suppression of PRL. Taken together, these results suggest that during lactation the activity of TIDA neurons is probably modulated by both PRL-dependent and PRL-independent mechanisms. Thus, we hypothesize that suckling-induced PRL acts either directly on TIDA neurons or indirectly through other systems, such as the POMC system, but not the NPY system, to modulate TH gene expression during lactation (Fig. 7Go). In addition, PRL-independent mechanisms, such as suckling-activated ARH NPY neurons, can modulate TIDA neurons directly (Fig. 7Go). It is plausible that the negative effect of PRL on TH expression is the result of interactions between these two mechanisms. More studies are needed to resolve this issue.



View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 7. A diagrammatic representation of putative pathways in the ARH involved in the modulation of TIDA neurons during lactation. The results of the present study suggest that a PRL-dependent mechanism is involved in negatively modulating TIDA neurons. PRL may act either directly on the TIDA neurons or indirectly through other systems in the ARH, such as the POMC system proposed in the diagram, to modulate the TIDA neurons. Also, suckling-activated NPY neurons (PRL-independent mechanism) may directly participate in the modulation of TIDA neurons upon activation by the suckling stimulus.

 
In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that the suckling stimulus activates two populations of NPY neurons and suppresses TIDA neuronal activity in the hypothalamus. Suckling-induced hyperprolactinemia plays a stimulatory role in suckling-activated NPY neurons in the DMH and an inhibitory role in suckling-induced suppression of TIDA activity.


   Acknowledgments
 
We thank Dr. Kevin Grove for comments on the manuscript. Thanks also to Drs. Steve Sabol at NIH and Tom Sherman at Georgetown University for providing the rat NPY cDNA plasmid (pBLNPY1) and the TH cDNA plasmid.


   Footnotes
 
1 This work was supported by NIH Grants HD-14643 and HD-18185 and Oregon Regional Primate Research Center Grant RR-00163. Back

Received April 7, 1998.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Smith MS 1993 Lactation alters neuropeptide-Y and proopiomelanocortin gene expression in the arcuate nucleus of the rat. Endocrinology 133:1258–1265[Abstract]
  2. Li C, Chen P, Smith MS 1998 The acute suckling stimulus induces expression of neuropeptide Y (NPY) in cells in the dorsomedial hypothalamus and increases NPY expression in the arcuate nucleus. Endocrinology 139:1645–1652[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Lee MC, Schiffman SS, Pappas TN 1994 Role of neuropeptides in the regulation of feeding behavior: a review of cholecystokinin, bombesin, neuropeptide Y, and galanin. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 18:313–323[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Tomaszuk A, Simpson C, Williams G 1996 Neuropeptide Y, the hypothalamus and the regulation of energy homeostasis. Horm Res 46:53–58[Medline]
  5. Kalra SP, Crowley WR 1992 Neuropeptide Y: a novel neuroendocrine peptide in the control of pituitary hormone secretion, and its relation to luteinizing hormone. Front Neuroendocrinol 13:1–46[Medline]
  6. Kalra SP, Kalra PS 1996 Nutritional infertility: the role of the interconnected hypothalamic neuropeptide Y-galanin-opioid network. Front Neuroendocrinol 17:371–401[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Demarest KT, Mckay DW, Riegle GD, Moore KE 1983 Biochemical indices of tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neuronal activity during lactation: a lack of response to prolactin. Neuroendocrinology 36:130–137[Medline]
  8. Wang H-J, Hoffman GE, Smith MS 1993 Suppressed tyrosine hydroxylase gene expression in the tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic system during lactation. Endocrinology 133:1657–1663[Abstract]
  9. Ben-Jonathan N 1985 Dopamine: a prolactin-inhibiting hormone. Endocr Rev 6:564–589[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. Ben-Jonathan N, Arbogast LA, Hyde JF 1989 Neuroendocrine regulation of prolactin release. Prog Neurobiol 33:399–447[CrossRef][Medline]
  11. Moore KE 1987 Interactions between prolactin and dopaminergic neurons. Biol Reprod 36:47–58[Abstract]
  12. Plotsky PM, De Greef WJ, Neill JD 1982 In situ voltammetric microelectrodes: application to the measurement of median eminence catecholamine release during simulated suckling. Brain Res 250:252–262
  13. Markey SP, Colburn RW, Kopin IJ, Aamodt RL 1978 Distribution and excretion in the rat and monkey of [82Br]bromocriptine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 211:31–35[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Demarest KT, Riegle GD, Moore KE 1985 Hypoprolactinemia induced by hypophysectomy and long-term bromocriptine treatment decreases tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neuronal activity and the responsiveness of these neurons to prolactin. Neuroendocrinology 40:369–376[Medline]
  15. Seeman P, Van Tol HHM 1994 Dopamine receptor pharmacology. Trends Pharmacol Sci 15:264–270[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Freeman ME, Sterman JR 1978 Ovarian steroid modulation of prolactin surges in cervically-stimulated ovariectomized rats. Endocrinology 102:1915–1920[Medline]
  17. Comb M, Hyman SE, Goodman HM 1987 Mechanisms of trans-synaptic regulation of gene expression. Trends Neurosci 10:473–478[CrossRef]
  18. Young WS, Zoeller RT 1987 Neuroendocrine gene expression in the hypothalamus: in situ hybridization histochemical studies. Cell Mol Neurobiol 7:353–366[CrossRef][Medline]
  19. Malabu UH, Kilpatrick A, Ware M, Vernon RG, Williams G 1994 Increased neuropeptide Y concentrations in specific hypothalamic regions of lactating rats: possible relationship to hyperphagia and adaptive changes in energy balance. Peptides 15:83–87[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Hoffman GE, Le WW, Abbud R, Lee WS, Smith MS 1994 Use of Fos-related antigens (FRAs) as markers of neuronal activity: FRA changes in dopamine neurons during proestrus, pregnancy and lactation. Brain Res 654:207–215[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Paxinos G, Waston C 1982 The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates. Academic Press, New York
  22. Pape J-R, Tramu G 1996 Suckling-induced changes in neuropeptide Y and proopiomelanocortin gene expression in the arcuate nucleus of the rat: evaluation of a putative intervention of prolactin. Neuroendocrinology 63:540–549[Medline]
  23. Pelletier G, Tong Y 1992 Lactation but not prolactin increases the levels of pre-proNPY mRNA in the rat arcuate nucleus. Mol Cell Neurosci 3:286–290
  24. Crumeyrolle-Arias M, Latouche J, Jammes H, Djiane J, Kelly PA, Reymond M, Haour F 1993 Prolactin receptors in the rat hypothalamus: autoradiographic localisation and characterization. Neuroendocrinology 57:457–466[Medline]
  25. Poky R, Paut-Pagano L, Goffin V, Kitahama K, Valatx J, Kelly PA, Jouvet M 1996 Distribution of prolactin receptors in the rat brain: immunohistochemical study. Neuroendocrinology 63:422–429[Medline]
  26. Chiu S, Koos RD, Wise PM 1992 Detection of prolactin receptor (PRL-R) mRNA in the rat hypothalamus and pituitary gland. Endocrinology 130:1747–1752[Abstract]
  27. Chiu S, Wise PM 1994 Prolactin receptor mRNA localization in the hypothalamus by in situ hybridization. J Neuroendocrinol 6:191–199[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Bakowska JC, Morrell JI 1997 Atlas of the neurons that express mRNA for the long form of the prolactin receptor in the forebrain of the female rat. J Comp Neurol 386:161–177[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Fleming AS, Suh EJ, Korsmit M, Rusak B 1994 Activation of Fos-like immunoreactivity in the medial preoptic area and limbic structures by maternal and social interactions in rats. Behav Neurosci 108:724–734[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Lonestein JS, Stern JM 1997 Role of the midbrain periaqueductal gray in maternal nurturance and aggression: c-fos and electrolytic lesion studies in lactating rats. J Neuosci 17:3364–3378
  31. Numan M, Numan MJ 1994 Expression of Fos-like immunoreactivity in the preoptic area of maternally behaving virgin and postpartum rats. Behav Neurosci 108:379–394[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Numan M, Numan MJ 1995 Importance of pup-related sensory inputs and maternal performance for the expression of fos-like immunoreactivity in the preoptic area and ventral bed nucleus of stria terminalis of postpartum rats. Behav Neurosci 109:135–149[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Li C, Chen P, Smith MS Neuropeptide Y (NPY) neurons in the arcuate nucleus (ARH) and dorsomedial nucleus (DMH), areas activated during lactation, project to the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus (PVH). Regul Peptides, in press
  34. Demarest KT, Riegle GD, Moore KE 1984 Prolactin-induced activation of tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neurons: evidence for both a rapid ‘tonic’ and a delayed ‘induction’ component. Neuroendocrinology 38:467–475[Medline]
  35. Mohankumar PS, Mohankumar SM, Quadri SK, Voogt JL 1997 Chronic hyperprolactinemia and changes in dopamine neurons. Brain Res Bull 42:435–441[CrossRef][Medline]
  36. Lerant A, Herman ME, Freeman ME 1996 Dopaminergic neurons of periventricular and arcuate nuclei of pseudopregnant rats: semicircadian rhythm in Fos-related antigens immunoreactivities and in dopamine concentration. Endocrinology 137:3621–3628[Abstract]
  37. Arbogast LA, Voogt JL 1996 The responsiveness of tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neurons to prolactin feedback is diminished between early lactation and midlactation in the rat. Endocrinology 137:47–54[Abstract]
  38. Kizer JS, Palkovits M, Brownstein MJ 1976 The projections of the A8, A9, A10 dopaminergic cell bodies: evidence for a nigral-hypothalamic-median eminence dopaminergic pathway. Brain Res 108:363–370[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Lerant A, Freeman ME 1997 Prolactin receptor-like immunoreactivity in subdivisions of A14 and A12 neurons in ovarian steroid replaced rats: a double label confocal microscopic study. Soc Neurosci Abstr 27:143
  40. Pelletier G, Morel G 1986 Endorphinic neurons are contacting the tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neurons in the rat brains. Peptides 7:1197–1199[CrossRef][Medline]
  41. Fitzsimmons MD, Olschowka JA, Wiegand SJ, Hoffman GE 1992 Interaction of opioid peptide-containing terminals with dopaminergic perikarya in the rat hypothalamus. Brain Res 581:10–18[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Callahan P, Baumann MH, Rabii J 1996 Inhibition of tuberoinfundibular dopaminergic neural activity during suckling: involvement of µ and {kappa} opiate receptor subtypes. J Neuroendocrinol 8:771–776[CrossRef][Medline]
  43. Pape J, Ciofi P, Tramu G 1996 Suckling-induced fos-immunoreactivity in subgroup of hypothalamic POMC neurons of the lactating rat: investigation of a role for prolactin. J Neuroendocrinol 8:375–386[CrossRef][Medline]
  44. Guy J, Pelletier G 1988 Neuronal interactions between neuropeptide Y (NPY) and catecholaminergic systems in the rat arcuate nucleus as shown by dual immunocytochemistry. Peptides 9:567–570[CrossRef][Medline]
  45. Pellettier G, Simard J 1991 Dopaminergic regulation of pre-proNPY mRNA levels in the rat arcuate nucleus. Neurosci Lett 127:96–98[CrossRef][Medline]
  46. Hong M, Li S, Pelletier G 1995 Role of neuropeptide Y in the regulation of tyrosine hydroxylase messenger ribonucleic acid levels in the male rat arcuate nucleus as evaluated by in situ hybridization. J Neuroendocrinol 7:25–28[CrossRef][Medline]




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Li, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Li, C.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. S.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals