Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleNew Research, Disorders of the Nervous System

Dynamic and Sex-Specific Changes in Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Neuron Activity and Excitability in a Mouse Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

Jiang Li, Jordyn A. Robare, Liying Gao, M. Amin Ghane, Jodi A. Flaws, Mark E. Nelson and Catherine A. Christian
eNeuro 11 September 2018, 5 (5) ENEURO.0273-18.2018; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0273-18.2018
Jiang Li
1Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jiang Li
Jordyn A. Robare
2Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Liying Gao
3Department of Comparative Biosciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M. Amin Ghane
2Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Amin Ghane
Jodi A. Flaws
3Department of Comparative Biosciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark E. Nelson
1Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
2Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
4Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mark E. Nelson
Catherine A. Christian
1Neuroscience Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
2Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
4Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Catherine A. Christian
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Extended Data
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Experimental design and timeline illustrating paradigm of test groups, procedures, and experimental time points. Procedures exclusive to experiments in females are marked in red.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Verification of KA injection targeting. A, Example cresyl violet staining from a KA-regular female with marked granule cell dispersion ipsilateral to the injection, and intact hippocampus contralateral to the injection. B, Cresyl violet (top) and GFAP/DAPI staining (bottom) from a KA-regular female. Note the strong GFAP immunoreactivity in the injected hippocampus, despite absence of major pathology observed in cresyl violet staining of adjacent sections. GFAP, green; DAPI, blue. Left, Ipsilateral to the injection. C, Example GFAP staining in tissue from a saline-injected mouse. Scale bar: 500 μm. Black arrow, hippocampal sclerosis detected by cresyl violet stain; white arrows, gliosis in CA and dentate gyrus detected by GFAP staining.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Diestrus versus estrus shifts in GnRH neuron mean firing rate are compromised in the intrahippocampal KA mouse model of TLE. A, Example raw traces of bursts (top) and individual (bottom) action currents detected in loose patch recordings. B, Representative raster plots of activity in GnRH neurons from control and KA-injected females. The black arrow marks the end of recording. The mean firing rate of each cell is given in parentheses. C, Mean ± SEM for GnRH neuron firing rate in control (open bars), KA-long (red bars), and KA-regular (blue bars) groups. KA-injected females are divided into KA-long and KA-regular groups based on their estrous cycle length (KA-long ≥ 7 d, KA-regular 4–6 d). Cells were recorded on diestrus (left) or estrus (right). D, Firing rates in individual cells, plotted on a logarithmic scale to show the full range. E, Correlation analyses between GnRH neuron firing rate and estrous cycle length in KA-injected females performed with data combined from KA-long (red circles) and KA-regular (blue circles) groups. Black line, line of best fit for all points. F, G, Comparison of GnRH neuron firing rate between controls, KA-long, and KA-regular groups based on anatomic location of somata for cells recorded on diestrus (F) or estrus (G). Data are shown as group mean firing rates (top, mean ± SEM) and individual neuron firing rates (bottom); *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 for comparisons between saline, KA-long, and KA-regular females by Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post hoc tests; #p < 0.05, ##p < 0.01 for comparisons between diestrus and estrus within groups by t tests or Mann–Whitney tests. In scatter plots of individual neuron firing rate, neurons plotted below y = 0.01 showed firing rates ≥0 Hz and below 0.01 Hz.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    GnRH neuron firing patterns are altered in KA-injected female mice on both diestrus and estrus. A, B, Examples of burst detection and firing pattern categorization. A, left, Example ISI joint scatter plot with a randomly selected candidate burst ISI threshold value (red line). The four quadrants divide all data into four clusters: C1, C2, C3, and C4. Right, Example ISI threshold validation shows the summed distance for each candidate burst ISI threshold value. The summed distance is calculated by the summation of squared distance between every point and its corresponding cluster centroid. The candidate value with the smallest summed distance is chosen as the optimal burst ISI threshold. B, Examples of scatter plots for GnRH neuron bursting (left), irregular spiking (middle), and tonic spiking (right) patterns. The different colors represent the final C1 to C4 distribution with the optimal burst ISI threshold for each cell. Black circles, individual centroids of clusters C1–C4. C, Proportion of GnRH neurons from female mice categorized into each pattern on diestrus (left) and estrus (right); *p < 0.05 for pair-wise Fisher’s exact test comparisons for indicated firing pattern between control and KA-injected groups; #p < 0.05 for comparisons for indicated firing pattern between diestrus and estrus within control and KA-injected groups. Δ, p < 0.05 for comparisons for indicated firing pattern between KA-long and KA-regular groups within the same estrous cycle stage.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    GnRH neuron burst properties on diestrus and estrus; only neurons displaying burst spiking patterns were used for comparisons. A, Cumulative probability distributions for burst properties of GnRH neurons from control female mice on diestrus (gray traces) and estrus (purple traces). Cumulative distributions were constructed using 100 randomly selected bursts per cell. B, Burst properties from KA-long female mice. C, Burst properties from KA-regular female mice; **p < 0.0001 for comparisons by Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. n.s., not significant. The interburst intervals are presented on logarithmic scales for better visualization of the major portion (1–99%) of the distributions.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Bursting GnRH neurons from KA-injected female mice show changed burst properties. A, Cumulative probability distributions for burst properties in cells displaying bursting patterns from control (black traces), KA-long (red traces), and KA-regular (blue traces) mice recorded on diestrus. Cumulative distributions were constructed using 100 randomly selected bursts per cell. B, Cumulative probability distributions for burst properties recorded on estrus; **p < 0.01 for comparisons between saline, KA-long, or KA-regular groups by pairwise Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. n.s., not significant. The interburst intervals are presented on logarithmic scales for better visualization of the major portion (1–99%) of the distributions.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    GnRH neuron intrinsic excitability is elevated on both diestrus and estrus in the intrahippocampal KA mouse model of TLE. A, Representative examples of evoked firing in response to depolarizing current steps in cells recorded on diestrus (left) and estrus (right). The KA traces are offset to highlight differences in spiking. All traces started from a membrane potential of approximately -73 mV, corrected for the liquid junction potential. B, Frequency-current (F-I) curves for GnRH neurons recorded on diestrus (left) or estrus (right), classified by the location of the somata of recorded neurons. Depolarizing current steps were applied in increments of 10 pA; *p < 0.05 for comparisons of area under the curve by three-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD. C, Mean ± SEM for area under the curve of evoked firing rate plots on diestrus and estrus in cells from control (black symbols and line), KA-long (red symbols and line), and KA-regular (blue symbols and line) mice. D, Mean ± SEM for AP threshold, membrane time constant (τ), and input resistance; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 by two-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD; #p < 0.05 for comparisons between diestrus and estrus within groups by three-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Changes in circulating P4 and E2 levels on diestrus and estrus as measured two months after KA injection. A, Mean ± SEM for P4 levels on diestrus (left) and estrus (right) in control (open bars), KA-long (red bars), and KA-regular (blue bars) mice. B, Mean ± SEM for E2 levels on diestrus (left) and estrus (right); *p < 0.05 for comparisons between saline, KA-long, and KA-regular groups by one-way ANOVA and Fisher’s post hoc tests; #p < 0.05 for comparisons between estrus and diestrus within groups by t tests.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Impacts of KA injection on GnRH neuron mean firing rate and excitability in male mice depend on soma location. A, Mean ± SEM for mean firing rate (left) and firing rates for individual GnRH neurons (right) from males treated with saline (open bars and circles) or KA (green bars and circles). B, Mean ± SEM for mean firing rate of GnRH neurons from control and KA-injected males classified by soma location; *p < 0.05, two-sample t test. C, Cumulative probability distributions for burst duration, number of spikes per burst, intraburst firing rate, and interburst intervals in cells from control and KA-injected males; **p < 0.0001 by Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. D, F-I curves for GnRH neurons from control and KA-injected males; *p < 0.05 for comparison of area under the curve by two-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD post hoc tests. E, Mean ± SEM for serum T in control and KA-injected male mice.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Extended Data
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Outcomes of video screening of acute seizures and hippocampal histology to verify KA injection targeting

    Video screening outcome (acute seizures)
    >2 seizures1 seizureNo seizures or videoTotal
    Females575769
    Males100515
    Histology for mice with no seizures or video (2 months post-KA injection)
    SclerosisGliosisNo sclerosis or gliosisTotal
    Females421*7
    Males5005
    • Number of seizures refers to behavioral seizures (Racine stage 3 or higher) observed within 5 h of KA injection. Hippocampal tissue from mice that either did not show acute seizures or for whom videos were not available was collected approximately two months after KA injection. Sclerosis was assessed via cresyl violet (Nissl) staining. Sections of hippocampi that did not display signs of sclerosis were further assessed for gliosis via GFAP staining; *, mouse removed from dataset in absence of either video confirmation of acute seizure induction or later development of hippocampal sclerosis/gliosis.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Effects of KA injection, estrous cycle stage, or an interaction between KA injection and cycle stage on probability of occurrence of each firing pattern in logistic regression analysis

    Firing patternKA injectionCycle stageInteraction of KA injection and cycle stage
    Tonic0.170.840.0009***
    Bursting0.180.300.99
    Irregular0.150.0072**0.25
    Quiet0.027*0.0003***1.00
    • p values from logistic regressions performed for each firing pattern; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    GnRH neuron excitability parameters and AP kinetics for each treatment and cycle stage in females

    ParametersDiestrusEstrusOverall ANOVA (F value)
    SalineKA-longKA-reg.SalineKA-longKA-reg.TreatmentCycle Stage
    AP threshold (mV)-28 + 3.6-39.1 + 2.5*-40.8 + 1.7**-35.8 + 2.8#-44.0 + 2.0*-40.4 + 2.16.57*4.54*
    Input resistance (MΩ)791.5 + 73.0852.3 + 62.3812.8 + 75.3766.8 + 85.9965.0 + 97.1796.0 + 73.11.370.43
    Capacitance (pF)18.5 + 2.714.8 + 0.716.5 + 1.617.9 + 2.016.1 + 0.818.5 + 1.10.631.21
    τ (ms)34.1 + 2.440.4 + 3.444.7 + 5.245.9 + 2.9#65.3 + 6.6*#51.7 + 3.94.45*17.02**
    Latency to firing (ms)0.57 + 0.070.47 + 0.050.48 + 0.080.50 + 0.070.36 + 0.08*0.43 + 0.061.662.40
    ISI first 10 spikes (ms)10.0 + 0.39.1 + 0.29.6 + 0.49.1 + 0.49.8 + 0.59.2 + 0.32.710.50
    Ins. freq. first 10 spikes (Hz)112.9 + 6.1122.3 + 4.1117.9 + 6.0130.3 + 7.2113.8 + 5.7119.8 + 5.10.100.50
    FWHM (ms)2.1 + 0.12.2 + 0.12.3 + 0.22.4 + 0.12.5 + 0.22.4 + 0.10.990.43
    AHP (pA)35.0 + 3.229.7 + 2.027.9 + 1.830.2 + 1.428.7 + 2.027.9 + 2.02.520.33
    Time to AHP (ms)3.8 + 0.13.8 + 0.13.7 + 0.24.1 + 0.23.9 + 0.33.8 + 0.30.190.76
    Max rise slope171.3 + 11.7182.7 + 12.6155.8 + 14.4155.5 + 12.2157.1 + 13.0163.1 + 15.40.581.66
    Max decay slope-80.9 + 3.7-78.8 + 4.2-67.4 + 6.5-74.8 + 3.8-71.9 + 3.4-73.2 + 3.81.940.88
    • ISI first 10 spikes, average ISI of the first 10 evoked spikes; Ins. freq. first 10 spikes, average instantaneous frequency of the first 10 evoked spikes; FWHM, full-width at half-maximum; AHP, afterhyperpolarization; time to AHP, time between the AP initiation and the peak of AHP; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 two-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD post hoc tests.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    GnRH neuron excitability parameters and AP kinetics for saline and KA-injected males

    ParametersSalineKA
    AP threshold (mV)-40.6 + 2.9-42.3 + 2.3
    Input resistance (MΩ)745.6 + 36.91892.2 + 984.2
    Capacitance (pF)16.7 + 1.015.7 + 1.0
    τ (ms)51.0 + 3.761.7 + 6.5
    Latency to firing (ms)628.1 + 67.2493.5 + 68.6
    ISI first 10 spikes (ms)123.4 + 5.4121.4 + 3.7
    Ins. freq. first 10 spikes (Hz)9.9 + 1.29.9 + 0.5
    FWHM (ms)2.3 + 0.122.4 + 0.3
    AHP31.6 + 2.632.8 + 1.9
    Time to AHP3.6 + 0.13.5 + 0.2
    Max rise slope187.3 + 11.7158.9 + 3.2
    Max decay slope-77.5 + 5.1-75.3 + 4.2
    • ISI first 10 spikes: average ISI of the first 10 evoked spikes; Ins. freq. first 10 spikes, average instantaneous frequency of the first 10 evoked spikes; FWHM, full-width at half-maximum; AHP, afterhyperpolarization; time to AHP, time between the AP initiation and the peak of AHP. Two-sample t tests for each parameter did not identify any differences between controls and KA-injected groups.

Extended Data

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Extended Data Figure 1.

    GnRH neuron firing pattern and burst properties analyzer. This code was created in MATLAB R2015b running in a Windows 10 operating system. Run PlotBursts.m in MATLAB to generate the ISI scatter plot, find the optimal burst ISI threshold, view the ratio of data points between quadrants in the scatter plot, generate cumulative probability plots of the examined burst properties, and execute Kolmogorov–Smirnov comparisons of the probability plots. Example data from two GnRH neurons (saline-injected females, diestrus, and estrus) are provided for demonstration purposes. The code is written to analyze raw data containing neuron spike times in the .mat format. More details are available in the README file and documentation within the script. Download Extended Data F, ZIP file.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 5 (5)
eNeuro
Vol. 5, Issue 5
September/October 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Dynamic and Sex-Specific Changes in Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Neuron Activity and Excitability in a Mouse Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Dynamic and Sex-Specific Changes in Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Neuron Activity and Excitability in a Mouse Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy
Jiang Li, Jordyn A. Robare, Liying Gao, M. Amin Ghane, Jodi A. Flaws, Mark E. Nelson, Catherine A. Christian
eNeuro 11 September 2018, 5 (5) ENEURO.0273-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0273-18.2018

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Dynamic and Sex-Specific Changes in Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Neuron Activity and Excitability in a Mouse Model of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy
Jiang Li, Jordyn A. Robare, Liying Gao, M. Amin Ghane, Jodi A. Flaws, Mark E. Nelson, Catherine A. Christian
eNeuro 11 September 2018, 5 (5) ENEURO.0273-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0273-18.2018
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
    • Author Response
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • excitability
  • GnRH
  • hormone
  • patch clamp electrophysiology
  • temporal lobe epilepsy

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

New Research

  • A Very Fast Time Scale of Human Motor Adaptation: Within Movement Adjustments of Internal Representations during Reaching
  • TrkB Signaling Influences Gene Expression in Cortistatin-Expressing Interneurons
  • Optogenetic Activation of β-Endorphin Terminals in the Medial Preoptic Nucleus Regulates Female Sexual Receptivity
Show more New Research

Disorders of the Nervous System

  • The PDGFBB-PDGFRβ Pathway and Laminins in Pericytes Are Involved in the Temporal Change of AQP4 Polarity during Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Pathogenesis
  • The Ventral Pallidum Innervates a Distinct Subset of Midbrain Dopamine Neurons
  • Rethinking Alzheimer's: Harnessing Cannabidiol to Modulate IDO and cGAS Pathways for Neuroinflammation Control
Show more Disorders of the Nervous System

Subjects

  • Disorders of the Nervous System
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.