Acupuncture ameliorated depression-like symptoms in CUMS rats.
Behavioral test results were shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. Compared with the control group, our results showed significant reduction in rats’ weight growth (F (3.000, 21.32) = 32.38, P < 0.0001, Fig. 1C and D), sucrose intake (F (3.000, 27.43) = 13.58, P < 0.05, Fig. 2A), number of grids crossed (F (3.000, 19.21) = 12.74, P < 0.001, Fig. 2C) and time in open arms (P < 0.01, Fig. 2G) but more immobility duration total (F (3.000, 13.48) = 10.96, P < 0.01, Fig. 2B), fecal excretion times (F (3.000, 23.83) = 12.47, P < 0.01, Fig. 2F), and time in closed arms (P < 0.001, Fig. 2H) after CUMS. No significance between intervention groups and control one (P > 0.05). The alteration of activity track of rats in OFT and EPM have been also shown in Fig. 2D and E. Whereas, compared with CUMS group, acupuncture group showed more weight gain from the 21st day (F (3.000, 21.32) = 32.38, P < 0.05, Fig. 1C and D), sucrose consumption (F (3.000, 27.43) = 13.58, P < 0.01, Fig. 2A), grids crossed(F (3.000, 19.21) = 12.74, P < 0.01, Fig. 2C), and time in open arms (P < 0.001, Fig. 2G), but less immobility duration total (F (3.000, 13.48) = 10.96, P < 0.05, Fig. 2B), fecal excretion times (F (3.000, 23.83) = 12.47, P < 0.001, Fig. 2F) and time in closed arms (P < 0.01, Fig. 2H). There was no statistical significance between groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05). The above indicated a beneficial effect of acupuncture on depression-like behavior of CUMS rats as that of fluoxetine.
Acupuncture depressed activation of HMGB1/ TLR4 signaling pathway in amygdala of CUMS rats.
HMGB1/ TLR4 signaling pathway in amygdala were mainly detected with WB analyses and RT-PCR as illustrated in Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table 3. HMGB1 was also visualized by IF. Overall, compared with the control, protein and mRNA concentrations of HMGB1(F (3.000, 7.019) = 8.568, P < 0.05, Fig. 3B; F (3.000, 6.591) = 10.36, P < 0.01, Fig. 3E) and TLR4 (F (3.000, 4.575) = 5.003, P = 0.0678, Fig. 3C; P < 0.05, Fig. 3F) in amygdala were increased in CUMS group. There was no statistical significance between intervention groups and control group (P > 0.05). These increased levels in the pathway were reduced respectively by acupuncture to varying extents: protein and mRNA levels of HMGB1(F (3.000, 7.019) = 8.568, P = 0.0844, Fig. 3B; F (3.000, 6.591) = 10.36, P = 0.0814, Fig. 3E) and TLR4 (F (3.000, 4.575) = 5.003, P = 0.2980, Fig. 3C; P = 0.6388, Fig. 3F). In addition, the %area of HMGB1 was increased visibly (F (3.000, 4.901) = 15.54, P = 0.0541, Fig. 3G and H) after stress but reduced by acupuncture (F (3.000, 4.901) = 15.54, P < 0.05, Fig. 3G and H). All the above indexes had no statistical significance between acupuncture groups and fluoxetine groups (P > 0.05). Though the effect of acupuncture on TLR4 was light, there existed a trend of alleviating inflammation via HMGB1/ TLR4 signaling pathway under acupuncture intervention in general.
Acupuncture reversed structural alteration and elevated inflammation in spleens of CUMS rats.
We measured the length and weight of spleens in rats in Fig. 4A-C. Rats under CUMS condition had shorter (F (3.000, 14.16) = 6.393, P < 0.01, Fig. 4C) and lighter (F (3.000, 13.35) = 4.284, P = 0.0662, Fig. 4B) spleens than they in CON. Acupuncture could improve the length (F (3.000, 14.16) = 6.393, P = 0.2586, Fig. 4C) and weight (F (3.000, 13.35) = 4.284, P = 0.1115, Fig. 4B) of spleens marginally. No significance was observed between groups of intervention and control (P > 0.05), or between groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05).
Further investigations of HMGB1/TLR4 pathway and pro-inflammatory factors in spleens were measured with WB (Fig. 4D-H and Supplementary Table 3). Compared with the control, the protein concentration of HMGB1(F (3, 8) = 9.370, P < 0.01, Fig. 4E), TLR4 (F (3,8) = 11.56, P < 0.001, Fig. 4G), IL1β (F (3, 8) = 10.77, P < 0.01, Fig. 4H) and TNFα (F (3,8) = 10.11, P < 0.01, Fig. 4F) were significantly elevated in CUMS group. No statistical significances between intervention groups and control group were observed (P > 0.05). These increased levels were reduced respectively by acupuncture: HMGB1 (F (3, 8) = 9.370, P < 0.05, Fig. 4E), TLR4 (F (3,8) = 11.56, P < 0.05, Fig. 4G), IL1β (F (3, 8) = 10.77, P = 0.0549, Fig. 4H) and TNFα (F (3,8) = 10.11, P < 0.05, Fig. 4F). There was no significance between groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05). These indicated acupuncture could affect spleens both functionally and structurally, similarly fluoxetine.
Acupuncture decreased pro-inflammatory factors in amygdala and serum of CUMS rats.
To explore whether acupuncture reduced inflammation, pro-inflammatory factors, such as IL6, IL1β, TNFα and CRP in amygdala and serum were detected with ELISA. As shown in Fig. 5A-H, CUMS markedly increased the levels of CRP (F (3.000, 14.56) = 6.496, P < 0.05, Fig. 5A; F (3.000, 19.68) = 10.27, P < 0.01, Fig. 5E), IL6 (6; F (3.000, 19.01) = 14.16, P < 0.001, Fig. 5B; F (3.000, 13.53) = 16.69, P < 0.01, Fig. 5F), TNFα (F (3.000, 19.14) = 13.81, P < 0.001, Fig. 5C; F (3.000, 17.00) = 23.93, P < 0.001, Fig. 5G) and IL1β (F (3, 20) = 7.590, P < 0.001, Fig. 5D; P < 0.001, Fig. 5H) in amygdala and serum. Acupuncture could significantly decrease the level of IL6 (F (3.000, 19.01) = 14.16, P < 0.01, Fig. 5B), TNFα (F (3.000, 19.14) = 13.81, P < 0.05, Fig. 5C) and IL1β (F (3, 20) = 7.590, P < 0.05, Fig. 5D) in amygdala, CRP (F (3.000, 19.68) = 10.27, P < 0.01, Fig. 5E), IL6 (F (3.000, 13.53) = 16.69, P < 0.05, Fig. 5F), TNFα (F (3.000, 17.00) = 23.93, P < 0.01, Fig. 5G) and IL1β(P < 0.05, Fig. 5H) in serum. Acupuncture did not affect CRP levels (F (3.000, 14.56) = 6.496, P = 0.1435, Fig. 5A) in amygdala. There was no significance between the groups of control and intervention (P > 0.05), or between the groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05). These alterations indicated that acupuncture reduced inflammatory environments in peripheral blood and amygdala, similar to fluoxetine positive controls.
Acupuncture depressed the hyperactivation of HPA axis in CUMS rats.
We also detected the concentrations of CRH, ACTH and CORT using ELISA to test the activation of HPA axis. In Fig. 6A-F, the expression of CRH (F (3.000, 18.83) = 7.954, P = 0.0517, Fig. 6A; F (3, 20) = 9.871, P < 0.001, Fig. 6D), ACTH (F (3, 20) = 2.591, P < 0.05, Fig. 6B; F (3, 20) = 8.190, P < 0.001, Fig. 6E) and CORT (F (3.000, 15.81) = 7.659, P < 0.01, Fig. 6C; F (3, 20) = 9.995, P < 0.001, Fig. 6F) in amygdala and serum were elevated in CUMS rats. There was no significance between control groups and two intervention groups (P > 0.05). Interestingly, acupuncture could reduce the level of CRH (F (3.000, 18.83) = 7.954, P < 0.01, Fig. 6A; F (3, 20) = 9.871, P < 0.01, Fig. 6D) in amygdala and serum, ACTH (F (3, 20) = 8.190, P < 0.05, Fig. 6E) and CORT (F (3, 20) = 9.995, P < 0.01, Fig. 6F) in serum and CORT (F (3.000, 15.81) = 7.659, P = 0.0623, Fig. 6C) in amygdala. No significance between acupuncture group and fluoxetine group could be seen from the above indicators (P > 0.05). These indicated that acupuncture depressed the hyperactivation of HPA axis of CUMS rats as fluoxetine did.
Acupuncture changed the activation of microglia and astrocytes in amygdala of CUMS rats.
To visualize the expression of IBA1 and GFAP in amygdala, immunofluorescence was performed. As Fig. 7 and Supplementary Table 3 show, compared with the control group, the %area of IBA1 and GFAP in the model group were (F (3, 8) = 2.808, P = 0.5632, Fig. 7C) and (F (3, 8) = 2.380, P = 0.2659, Fig. 7D); compared with the model group, the %area of IBA1 and GFAP in AP group were P = 0.2084 and P = 0.1435, respectively. There existed the same effect between groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05).
Acupuncture ameliorated immunity depression in spleens of CUMS rats.
To probe into the effects of acupuncture on immune response in spleen, the concentration of NKG2D was detected using WB and RT-PCR as demonstrated in Fig. 8 and Supplementary Table 3. As we can observe, when compared with the control, the expression of NKG2D protein (F (3.000, 4.674) = 17.04, P < 0.05, Fig. 8C) and its mRNA (P < 0.05, Fig. 8D) were both obviously decreased by CUMS. Acupuncture slightly reversed the increased protein level of NKG2D (F (3.000, 4.674) = 17.04, P = 0.0865, Fig. 8C), but did not affect its mRNA (P = 0.5227, Fig. 8D). No significances between groups of acupuncture and fluoxetine (P > 0.05) were observed.