Ive ML240 supplier reduction of the layer II/III stellate neurons within the entorhinal cortex in MCI, alterations to the glutamatergic system in the hippocampus in MCI has received limited investigation. For example, there is a reduction in free glutamate in AD (Hyman et al., 1987), but not in the MCI hippocampus (Rupsingh et al., 2011). Examination of NMDANeuroscience. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 September 12.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptMufson et al.Pagereceptor levels produced conflicting results, with some groups showing a decrease in AD (Greenamyre et al., 1985, 1987) and others showing no change (Geddes et al., 1986; Monaghan et al., 1987; Cowburn et al., 1988b). There is also a reduction in AMPA and mGlu receptor density in AD (Dewar et al., 1991; Ginsberg et al., 2000, 2006). Others report a loss of cortical and hippocampal glutamatergic uptake sites in AD, which were interpreted as nerve terminal loss (Palmer et al., 1986; Cross et al., 1987; Hardy et al., 1987; Procter et al., 1987; Cowburn et al., 1988a, b). These inconsistencies may be due to subregionselective changes in hippocampal glutamate receptors. An immunohistochemical analyses of glutamate receptor subunit NMDAR1 in the hippocampus reported that AD cases with mild/ moderate pathology (Braak I II) were similar to controls while more severe AD cases (Braak IV I) had increased NMDAR1 immunolabeling in the CA fields. In contrast, the dentate gyrus showed a reduction in NMDAR1 labeling particularly within the outer molecular layer the terminal zone of the perforant pathway (Ikonomovic et al., 1999). Further supporting glutamatergic plasticity changes in AD hippocampus, several studies reported that a selective subtype of AMPA glutamate receptor (GluR2) is reduced in AD entorhinal cortex and hippocampus and this downregulation precedes the formation of neurofibrillary pathology (Ikonomovic et al., 1997). Adding to the complexity of glutamatergic changes in AD is the observed reduction in glutamate concentration in AD brain (Ellison et al., 1986; Sasaki et al., 1986; Hyman et al., 1987) that make no distinction between neuronal and metabolic pools, limiting potential interpretations. A clinical pathological study using specific immunological markers of glutamatergic neurons to assess the structural involvement of the glutamatergic system within midfrontal cortex across progressive stages of AD demonstrated a striking pathology-dependent pattern of glutamatergic synaptic remodeling with disease progression (Bell et al., 2007). Subjects with MCI displayed an elevation in glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density, reminiscent to that reported in the hippocampal cholinergic system, which then depletes and is lost with disease progression (DeKosky et al., 2002; Ikonomovic et al., 2003). This increased glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density correlated with improved cognitive performance in the AD group, but not for people with MCI, in which the increase in glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density was paradoxically associated with decreased cognitive ability. The authors suggest two possible explanations: either the upregulation indicates a type of compensatory response intended to counter the effects of preexisting synaptotoxicity, or upregulated terminals are indicative of an uncoordinated GW9662 price aberrant response not indicative of a wellorchestrated synaptic plasticity. Although neither of these interpretations have been supported experimenta.Ive reduction of the layer II/III stellate neurons within the entorhinal cortex in MCI, alterations to the glutamatergic system in the hippocampus in MCI has received limited investigation. For example, there is a reduction in free glutamate in AD (Hyman et al., 1987), but not in the MCI hippocampus (Rupsingh et al., 2011). Examination of NMDANeuroscience. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2016 September 12.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptMufson et al.Pagereceptor levels produced conflicting results, with some groups showing a decrease in AD (Greenamyre et al., 1985, 1987) and others showing no change (Geddes et al., 1986; Monaghan et al., 1987; Cowburn et al., 1988b). There is also a reduction in AMPA and mGlu receptor density in AD (Dewar et al., 1991; Ginsberg et al., 2000, 2006). Others report a loss of cortical and hippocampal glutamatergic uptake sites in AD, which were interpreted as nerve terminal loss (Palmer et al., 1986; Cross et al., 1987; Hardy et al., 1987; Procter et al., 1987; Cowburn et al., 1988a, b). These inconsistencies may be due to subregionselective changes in hippocampal glutamate receptors. An immunohistochemical analyses of glutamate receptor subunit NMDAR1 in the hippocampus reported that AD cases with mild/ moderate pathology (Braak I II) were similar to controls while more severe AD cases (Braak IV I) had increased NMDAR1 immunolabeling in the CA fields. In contrast, the dentate gyrus showed a reduction in NMDAR1 labeling particularly within the outer molecular layer the terminal zone of the perforant pathway (Ikonomovic et al., 1999). Further supporting glutamatergic plasticity changes in AD hippocampus, several studies reported that a selective subtype of AMPA glutamate receptor (GluR2) is reduced in AD entorhinal cortex and hippocampus and this downregulation precedes the formation of neurofibrillary pathology (Ikonomovic et al., 1997). Adding to the complexity of glutamatergic changes in AD is the observed reduction in glutamate concentration in AD brain (Ellison et al., 1986; Sasaki et al., 1986; Hyman et al., 1987) that make no distinction between neuronal and metabolic pools, limiting potential interpretations. A clinical pathological study using specific immunological markers of glutamatergic neurons to assess the structural involvement of the glutamatergic system within midfrontal cortex across progressive stages of AD demonstrated a striking pathology-dependent pattern of glutamatergic synaptic remodeling with disease progression (Bell et al., 2007). Subjects with MCI displayed an elevation in glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density, reminiscent to that reported in the hippocampal cholinergic system, which then depletes and is lost with disease progression (DeKosky et al., 2002; Ikonomovic et al., 2003). This increased glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density correlated with improved cognitive performance in the AD group, but not for people with MCI, in which the increase in glutamatergic presynaptic bouton density was paradoxically associated with decreased cognitive ability. The authors suggest two possible explanations: either the upregulation indicates a type of compensatory response intended to counter the effects of preexisting synaptotoxicity, or upregulated terminals are indicative of an uncoordinated aberrant response not indicative of a wellorchestrated synaptic plasticity. Although neither of these interpretations have been supported experimenta.