Title: “Effects of chronic intraperitoneal monosodium glutamate on models of anxiety and motor function in mice”Assignment | Essay Help Services.

Vancouver superscriptTitle:
Effects of chronic intraperitoneal monosodium glutamate on models of anxiety and
motor function in mice”
Introduction
Monosodium glutamate
(MSG) is a flavor enhancer used for a pleasant taste sensation
produced by it known as UMAMIUMAMI1 when added to food materials There are existing controversies regarding the safety of MSG’s usage in food. Anxiety is a general term for several
disorders that cause nervousness, fear, apprehension, and worrying. The use of animal models
especially mice models are well established in the study of psychiatric disorders including
anxiety Mice models of anxiety are very relia ble in investigating the antianxiety effects of
novel compounds and also to demonstrate the anxiety inducing effects of a compound
Animal studies have demonstrated that i ntraperitoneal (i.p) administration of MSG for
21 days at a dose of 10mg/kg showed anxiolytic effect and 80 mg/ kg showed anxiogenic
effecteffect2 MSG at a dose of 6 mg/kg ha s demonstrated a reduction in motor function and
c o o rdination in rats rats3 Studies on the e ffects of MSG administration in rodents are of short
durationduration4. Studies exploring the effect of chronic i.p MSG on models of anxiety and motor
function are lacking. Hence, w e intend to evaluate and compare the effects of acute and chronic
administration of MSG in models of anxiety and motor co ordination in mice
Review of Literature: Urbanisation, fast food culture, and the absence of stringent regulations by the
government have increased the use of MSG by the population of all socioeconomic strata alike alike5 with average daily human consumption of 0.3 1 gram gram6 The toxic effects of MSG have been
demonstrated in human and animal studies studies7 with reports of MSG induced nerve cell damage in
cerebral cortex of rat rat8
Aims & objectives: Our study ai ms at evaluating the effects of 3 month administration of daily i.p MSG at doses
of 40, 60 and 80 mg/kg (equivalent to daily human consumption) on models of anxiety and
motor function .
Primary objective
To evaluate the effects of
To evaluate the effects of 33–monthmonth i.pi.p administration of MSG at doses of 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg administration of MSG at doses of 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg and 80 mg/kg in models of anxiety in adult mice.and 80 mg/kg in models of anxiety in adult mice.
Secondary objectives:
Secondary objectives:
1.
1. To evaluate the effects of 3To evaluate the effects of 3–month month i.pi.p administration of MSG at doses 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, administration of MSG at doses 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, and 80 mg/kg in models of motor function in adult mice. and 80 mg/kg in models of motor function in adult mice.
2.
2. To compare the acute and chronic effects of To compare the acute and chronic effects of i.pi.p administration of administration of MSG on models of MSG on models of anxiety and motor function in adult mice.anxiety and motor function in adult mice.
3.
3. To evaluate the histoTo evaluate the histological and immunohistochemical changes produced by 3logical and immunohistochemical changes produced by 3–month month i.pi.p administration of MSG at doses 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, and 80 mg/kg in the administration of MSG at doses 40 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg, and 80 mg/kg in the brainbrain (medial (medial prefrontal cortex, occipital cortex) of adult mice.prefrontal cortex, occipital cortex) of adult mice.
Methodology
Methodology::
Sample size Sample size — calculated usingcalculated using G*G* POWER POWER ® version ® version 3.1.9.23.1.9.2, using repeated , using repeated measures ANOVA as the test of significancemeasures ANOVA as the test of significance assuming a α of 0.05, power of 95%. Assuming a 10% attrition rate, the corrected sample size was calculated using the formula
[sample size /1-(attrition/100)10].
10 animals in each group
10 animals in each group is the minimum number of animals required to detect is the minimum number of animals required to detect statisticallystatistically significant difference between groups and within the significant difference between groups and within the groupgroup in in behavioralbehavioral models. models. 1010 animals are required in the negative control group to detect changes between animals are required in the negative control group to detect changes between the groups to the groups to avoid bias due toavoid bias due to individual variationindividual variation. So total number of 40 animals required. So total number of 40 animals required.. 4040 mice mice will be randomly will be randomly divided into 4 groupsdivided into 4 groups after an initial quarantine and after an initial quarantine and acclimation period of 10 daysacclimation period of 10 days. . Group 1 (n=Group 1 (n=1010)) will will serve as the serve as the negative negative control control and and receive receive standardstandard laboratory diet and RO waterlaboratory diet and RO water adad–libitumlibitum along with 0.5ml distilled along with 0.5ml distilled water water i.pi.p daily for daily for 3 months3 months. Group 2 (n=10), group 3 (n=10) and group 4 (n=10) will receive . Group 2 (n=10), group 3 (n=10) and group 4 (n=10) will receive daily daily MSG MSG at dosesat doses 4040 mg/kg,mg/kg, 6060 mg/kg,mg/kg, 80 80 mg/kg respectively mg/kg respectively for 3 months for 3 months i.pi.p 2 along along with standardwith standard laboratory laboratory diet diet and RO water and RO water adad–libitum.libitum. Anxiety will be evaluated by using open field exploration testAnxiety will be evaluated by using open field exploration test11, hole board test, hole board test12, , elevated plus maze testelevated plus maze test13, social interaction test, social interaction test14 and and lightlight–darkdark exploration testexploration test15 Motor function will be evaluated using open field distance testMotor function will be evaluated using open field distance test16, rearing count , rearing count (cylinder) test(cylinder) test17,, Scurry speed testScurry speed test17,, TightropeTightrope suspensionsuspension17 testtest and accelerating and accelerating RotarodRotarod testtest17..
At the
At the completioncompletion of the experiment, animals will be sacrificed by COof the experiment, animals will be sacrificed by CO22 inhalation, and inhalation, and sections of the sections of the brainbrain will be examined for pathological changes induced by MSG in occipital will be examined for pathological changes induced by MSG in occipital cortex and medial prefrontal cortex using histopathological (n=5 in cortex and medial prefrontal cortex using histopathological (n=5 in all groupsall groups)) studiesstudies and glial and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) using immunohistochemical (n=5 in fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) using immunohistochemical (n=5 in all groupsall groups) analysis.) analysis. AnalysisAnalysis:: Evaluation will be done at baseline,Evaluation will be done at baseline, 33 days,days, 1, 2 and 3 months of MSG administration 1, 2 and 3 months of MSG administration and will be compared within groups and with the negative controlsand will be compared within groups and with the negative controls using repeated measures using repeated measures ANOVA and ANOVA and oneone–wayway ANOVAANOVA respectivelyrespectively. .
Expected Outcome: Since MSG at comparable doses forSince MSG at comparable doses for shorter duration produced anxiety like shorter duration produced anxiety like behaviour, behaviour, we are we are expecting expecting anxiety like behaviouranxiety like behaviour in animal in animal models, reduction in motor functions and models, reduction in motor functions and degeneration of cerebral cortex.degeneration of cerebral cortex. Keywords:Keywords: Monosodium glutamate, MSG, anxiety, motor functionMonosodium glutamate, MSG, anxiety, motor function RefReferenceserences
1. Kurihara K. Umami the Fifth Basic Taste: History of Studies on Receptor Mechanisms and Role as a Food Flavor. Biomed Res Int [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Aug 16];2015. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4515277/
2. (PDF) Neurobehavioural, neurochemical and histological effects of monosodium glutamate in mice. [cited 2018 Sep 26]; Available from: http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306012589_Neurobehavioural_neurochemical_and_histological_effects_of_monosodium_glutamate_in_mice
3. Sayed H. Monosodium Glutamate-Induced Cerebellar Toxicity and Possible Role of Nitric Oxide in Adult Albino Rats. https://www.facebook.com/toxicology.forensiccases. 2015 Oct 22;11.
4. Onaolapo OJ, Onaolapo AY, Akanmu MA, Olayiwola G. Changes in Spontaneous Working-memory, Memory-recall and Approach-avoidance following “Low Dose” Monosodium Glutamate in Mice. neuroscience 2016, Vol 3, Pages 317-337 [Internet]. 2016 Sep 7 [cited 2018 Sep 1]; Available from: http://www.aimspress.com/article/10.3934/Neuroscience.2016.3.317/fulltext.html
5. Kazmi Z, Fatima I, Perveen S, Malik SS. Monosodium glutamate: Review on clinical reports. International Journal of Food Properties. 2017 Dec 29;20(sup2):1807–15.
6. Hashem HE, El-Din Safwat MD, Algaidi S. The effect of monosodium glutamate on the cerebellar cortex of male albino rats and the protective role of vitamin C (histological and immunohistochemical study). J Mol Histol. 2012 Apr;43(2):179–86.
7. Yang WH, Drouin MA, Herbert M, Mao Y, Karsh J. The monosodium glutamate symptom complex: Assessment in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 1997 Jun 1;99(6, Part 1):757–62.
8. A Salman N, A Abdel-Fattah N, B El-Kholy W, Shereef N. Histological and genetic studies on the effect of monosodium glutamate on the cerebellar cortex and the possible protective role of ascorbic acid in adult and neonate albino rat. 2012 Jan 1;8.
9. Nair AB, Jacob S. A simple practice guide for dose conversion between animals and human. J Basic Clin Pharm. 2016 Mar;7(2):27–31.
10. Charan J, Kantharia ND. How to calculate sample size in animal studies? J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2013 Oct;4(4):303–6.
11. Onaolapo OJ, Aremu OS, Onaolapo AY. Monosodium glutamate-associated alterations in open field, anxiety-related and conditioned place preference behaviours in mice. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2017 Jul;390(7):677–89.
12. Mendonça Netto S, Warela RWB, Fechine MF, Queiroga MN, Quintans-Júnior LJ. Anxiolytic-like effect of Rauvolfia ligustrina Willd: ex Roem. & Schult., Apocynaceae, in the elevated plus-maze and hole-board tests. Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia. 2009 Dec;19(4):888–92.
13. Komada M, Takao K, Miyakawa T. Elevated Plus Maze for Mice. J Vis Exp [Internet]. 2008 Dec 22 [cited 2018 Aug 30];(22). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2762911/
14. Kaidanovich-Beilin O, Lipina T, Vukobradovic I, Roder J, Woodgett JR. Assessment of Social Interaction Behaviors. J Vis Exp [Internet]. 2011 Feb 25 [cited 2018 Dec 6];(48). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3197404/
15. Bailey KR, Crawley JN. Anxiety-Related Behaviors in Mice. In: Buccafusco JJ, editor. Methods of Behavior Analysis in Neuroscience [Internet]. 2nd ed. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2009 [cited 2018 Aug 28]. (Frontiers in Neuroscience). Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK5221/
16. Seibenhener ML, Wooten MC. Use of the Open Field Maze to Measure Locomotor and Anxiety-like Behavior in Mice. J Vis Exp [Internet]. 2015 Feb 6 [cited 2018 Dec 6];(96). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4354627/
17. Justice JN, Carter CS, Beck HJ, Gioscia-Ryan RA, McQueen M, Enoka RM, et al. Battery of behavioral tests in mice that models age-associated changes in human motor function. Age (Dordr). 2014 Apr;36(2):583–95.