Fig. 8: Corticosterone signaling drives stress-reduction of parvalbumin interneuron (PV)-burst-spiking (BS) inhibition in males. | Nature Communications

Fig. 8: Corticosterone signaling drives stress-reduction of parvalbumin interneuron (PV)-burst-spiking (BS) inhibition in males.

From: Acute stress causes sex-specific changes to ventral subiculum synapses, circuitry, and anxiety-like behavior

Fig. 8: Corticosterone signaling drives stress-reduction of parvalbumin interneuron (PV)-burst-spiking (BS) inhibition in males.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a–d Impact of adrenergic receptor (AR) or corticosterone (Cort) synthesis inhibitors in stress-naive females. a Experimental schema. b Inhibitory post-synaptic current (IPSC) input-output curves (left; LED Intensity x Drug F(6, 117) = 0.9416, p = 0.4682) and slope (right; F(2, 6) = 0.9140, p = 0.4503; saline n = 13/3, AR n = 14/3, Cort n = 15/3). c Strontium-evoked asynchronous IPSC (aIPSC) amplitudes (F(2, 6) = 1.229, p = 0.3570; saline n = 14/3, AR n = 12/3, Cort n = 12/3). d IPSC PPR (50 ms) (F(2, 6) = 0.4402, p = 0.6631; saline n = 13/3, AR n = 14/3, Cort n = 15/3). e–h AR inhibition in stress-exposed males. e Experimental schema. f Input-output curve (left; LED Intensity x Stress Group F(6, 141) = 9.182, ****p > 0.0001, Control+Saline vs Stress + AR, 0.213 mW p = 0.9465, 0.528 mW p = 0.8516, 1.050 mW *p = 0.0412, 1.640 mW **p = 0.0033; Control + Saline vs Stress+Saline, 0.213 mW p = 0.9909, 0.528 mW **p = 0.0074, 1.050 mW ****p < 0.0001, 1.640 mW ****p < 0.0001) and slope (right; F(2, 7) = 7.844, *p = 0.0163, Control+Saline vs Stress+AR *p = 0.0283, Control + Saline vs Stress+Saline *p = 0.0186; Control + Saline n = 17/4, Stress+Saline n = 16/3, Stress + AR n = 17/3). g aIPSCs (F(2, 7) = 4.801, *p = 0.0487, Control + Saline vs Stress+AR p = 0.4003, Control + Saline vs Stress+Saline *p = 0.0344, Control+Saline n = 16/4, Stress + Saline n = 14/3, Stress+AR n = 13/4). (h) IPSC PPRs (50 ms; F(2, 7) = 1.629, p = 0.2625, Control+Saline n = 17/4, Stress+Saline n = 16/3, Stress + AR n = 17/3). i–l Cort inhibition in stress-exposed males. i Experimental schema. j Input-output curve (left; LED Intensity x Stress Group F(6, 144) = 11.88, ****p < 0.0001, Control + DMSO vs Stress + Cort, 0.213 mW p > 0.9999, 0.518 mW p > 0.9999, 1.050 mW p = 0.1380, 1.640 mW p = 0.9988; Control + DMSO vs Stress+DMSO, 0.213 mW p > 0.9999, 0.518 mW p = 0.1890, 1.050 mW ****p < 0.0001, 1.640 mW ****p < 0.0001) and slope (right; F(2, 7) = 5.235, *p = 0.0407, Control + DMSO vs Stress + Cort p = 0.8739, Control+DMSO vs Stress+DMSO *p = 0.0345; Control+DMSO n = 20/4, Stress+DMSO n = 14/3, Stress + Cort n = 14/3). k aIPSC amplitudes (F(2, 7) = 13.65, **p = 0.0038, Control + DMSO vs Stress+DMSO p = 0.2359, Control+DMSO vs Stress + DMSO *p = 0.0025, Control+DMSO n = 16/3, Stress+DMSO n = 13/3, Stress+Cort n = 12/3). l IPSC PPRs (50 ms; F(2, 7) = 0.02841, p = 0.9721, Control+DMSO n = 20/4, Stress+DMSO n = 16/3, Stress+Cort n = 14/3). Summary models for females (m) and males (n). Data are mean ± SEM calculated from individual cells. Significance: 2-way repeated measures ANOVA followed by Šidák’s post-hoc test (b–j input-output curves) or nested 1-way ANOVA followed by Šidák’s post-hoc test (b−j input-output slopes, c, d, g, h, k, l). Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page