Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24879866›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of physiology2014

Research tool: Validation of floxed α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor conditional knockout mice using in vitro and in vivo approaches.

Caterina M Hernandez, Ibdanelo Cortez, Zhenglin Gu, José O Colón-Sáez, Patricia W Lamb, Maki Wakamiya, Jerrel L Yakel, Kelly T Dineley

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of physiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. An α7 nicotinic and GABAThe Journal of physiology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Emerging Role of Neuron-Glia in Neurological Disorders: At a Glance.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Therapeutic Targeting ofPharmacological reviews · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Caterina M HernandezMitchell Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB), Galveston, TX, USA Department of Neurology, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA.
Ibdanelo CortezMitchell Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB), Galveston, TX, USA Department of Neurology, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA.
Zhenglin GuLaboratory of Neurobiology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIEHS/NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
José O Colón-SáezLaboratory of Neurobiology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIEHS/NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Patricia W LambLaboratory of Neurobiology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIEHS/NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Maki WakamiyaAnimal Resource Center, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA Institute for Translational Sciences, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA.
Jerrel L YakelLaboratory of Neurobiology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIEHS/NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Kelly T DineleyMitchell Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (UTMB), Galveston, TX, USA Department of Neurology, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA Rodent In Vivo Assessment Core, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA Center for Addiction Research, UTMB, Galveston, TX, USA ktdinele@utmb.edu.
National Institutes of Health · USThe University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · USGalveston College · USNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences · US

Funding

Modulation Of Neuronal Channels and Receptors in the BrainZIAES090089 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI YAKEL, JERREL L · 2009 to 2025
$42.2M
NIEHS Knock Out Mouse Core (KOMC) Annual ReportZICES102425 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RAY, MANAS · 2010 to 2025
$20.1M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is much interest in α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in CNS function since they are found throughout peripheral tissues as well as being highly expressed in brain regions implicated in attention, learning and memory. As such, the role of these receptors in many aspects of CNS function and disease is being actively investigated. To date, only one null mouse model (A7KO) is available which is non-conditional and constitutive. Since α7 nAChRs are present on neurons and glia (including astrocytes), as well as being developmentally regulated, there is an unmet need for the technical capability to control α7 nAChR gene expression. Therefore we have generated mice in which the fourth exon of the α7 nAChR gene (Chrna7) is flanked by loxP sites (B6-Chrna7(LBDEx4007Ehs)) which we refer to as floxed α7 nAChR conditional knockout or α7nAChR(flox). We validated the chosen approach by mating α7nAChR(flox) with mice expressing Cre recombinase driven by the glial acidic fibrillary protein (GFAP)-Cre promoter (GFAP-A7KO) to test whether α7nAChR(flox), GFAP-A7KO and appropriate littermate controls performed equally in our standard Rodent In Vivo Assessment Core battery to assess general health, locomotion, emotional and cognitive behaviours. Neither α7nAChR(flox) nor GFAP-A7KO exhibited significant differences from littermate controls in any of the baseline behavioural assessments we conducted, similar to the 'first generation' non-conditional A7KO mice. We also determined that α7 nAChR binding sites were absent on GFAP-positive astrocytes in hippocampal slices obtained from GFAP-A7KO offspring from α7nAChR(flox) and GFAP-Cre crosses. Finally, we validated that Cre recombinase (Cre)-mediated excision led to functional, cell- and tissue-specific loss of α7 nAChRs by demonstrating that choline-induced α7 nAChR currents were present in Cre-negative, but not synapsin promoter-driven Cre-positive, CA1 pyramidal neurons. Additionally, electrophysiological characterization of α7 nAChR-mediated current traces was similar in terms of amplitude and time constants of decay (during desensitization) for the α7nAChR(flox) and wild-type (WT) mice. Thus, we have in vivo and in vitro evidence that the Chrna7 exon 4 targeting strategy does not alter behavioural, cognitive, or electrophysiological properties compared to WT and that Cre-mediated excision is an effective approach to delete α7 nAChR expression in a cell-specific manner.

Indexed as

Action Potentialsalpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine ReceptorAnimalsAstrocytesCA1 Region, HippocampalExonsGene TargetingGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinIntegrasesMaze LearningMiceMice, KnockoutNeuronsPhenotypePromoter Regions, Geneticalpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine ReceptorChrna7 protein, mouseCre recombinaseGlial Fibrillary Acidic ProteinIntegrases

Identifiers

PMID24879866
PMCPMC4146370
OpenAlexW1540854925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.