Korte 2005
Korte 2005
Korte 2005
www.elsevier.com/locate/neubiorev
Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Box 65, Edelhertweg 15, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
b
Department of Animal Physiology, University of Groningen, Box 14, 9750 AA Haren, The Netherlands
c
Department of Zoology, Box 351800, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
d
Harold and Margaret Milliken Hatch Laboratory of Neuroendocrinology, Rockefeller University, 1230 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA
Abstract
Why do we get the stress-related diseases we do? Why do some people have flare ups of autoimmune disease, whereas others suffer from
melancholic depression during a stressful period in their life? In the present review possible explanations will be given by using different
levels of analysis.
First, we explain in evolutionary terms why different organisms adopt different behavioral strategies to cope with stress. It has become
clear that natural selection maintains a balance of different traits preserving genes for high aggression (Hawks) and low aggression (Doves)
within a population. The existence of these personality types (HawksDoves) is widespread in the animal kingdom, not only between males
and females but also within the same gender across species.
Second, proximate (causal) explanations are given for the different stress responses and how they work. Hawks and Doves differ in
underlying physiology and these differences are associated with their respective behavioral strategies; for example, bold Hawks
preferentially adopt the fightflight response when establishing a new territory or defending an existing territory, while cautious Doves show
the freezehide response to adapt to threats in their environment. Thus, adaptive processes that actively maintain stability through change
(allostasis) depend on the personality type and the associated stress responses.
Third, we describe how the expression of the various stress responses can result in specific benefits to the organism.
Fourth, we discuss how the benefits of allostasis and the costs of adaptation (allostatic load) lead to different trade-offs in health and
disease, thereby reinforcing a Darwinian concept of stress. Collectively, this provides some explanation of why individuals may differ in their
vulnerability to different stress-related diseases and how this relates to the range of personality types, especially aggressive Hawks and nonaggressive Doves in a population.
A conceptual framework is presented showing that Hawks, due to inefficient management of mediators of allostasis, are more likely to be
violent, to develop impulse control disorders, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, sudden death, atypical depression, chronic fatigue states and
inflammation. In contrast, Doves, due to the greater release of mediators of allostasis (surplus), are more susceptible to anxiety disorders,
metabolic syndromes, melancholic depression, psychotic states and infection.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Stress; Allostasis; Allostatic state; Allostatic load; Coping; Evolutionary stable strategy; Hawks; Doves; Fightflight; Freezehide; Darwin;
Evolution; Natural selection; Brain; Amygdala; Hippocampus; Locus coeruleus; Prefrontal cortex; Atypical depression; Melancholic depression; Chronic
fatigue; Psychosis; Rat; Birds; Human
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mechiel.korte@wur.nl (S.M. Korte).
0149-7634/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.08.009
Contents
1. General introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
5
5
6
6
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
7
8
9
10
10
12
13
13
14
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
15
16
16
16
18
18
18
19
19
20
21
21
22
23
24
25
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
1. General introduction
Due to the pioneering work of Hans Selye [1], the use of
the word Stress has become popular all over the world.
However, despite the vast amount of scientific research
generated in this field the term stress has been a stumbling
block right from its first use. The term has so many different
meanings [2] that it becomes counterproductive by inhibiting a proper application and critical interpretation of
experimental results. Stress has mostly been associated
with negative events and consequences, i.e. it can take its
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Table 1
The different geneenvironment interactions in Hawks and Doves and the consequences for fitness depend heavily on their biological role in a population, the
adopted behavioral strategy, the environmental context, food availability, and population cycle (see Sections 2.12.3)
Hawk
Dove
Behavioral strategy
Coping style
Emotional state
Biological role
Fightflight
Proactive
Aggressive and bold
Establish territory or defend existing territory
Exploration
Behavioral flexibility
Energy metabolism
Body damage (e.g. wounds, blood loss)
Advantage according to food availability
Advantage according to population cycle
Freezehide
Reactive
Non-aggressive and cautious
Adopt strategy to avoid danger within territory,
e.g. immobility
Cautious and thorough
Flexible
Energy conservation
Low risk
During food scarcity
When density is low
their own home cages but they froze if fresh sawdust was
used, i.e. reactive coping. The aggressive mice always
showed burying behavior, i.e. proactive coping, regardless
of the type of bedding material [35]. In line with these
results, it has been suggested that aggressive individuals
(Hawks) easily develop routines relatively independently of
environmental stimuli (rigid behavior) whereas non-aggressive ones (Doves) are more perceptive of changes in their
environment and consequently show more flexibility in their
behavior [30,39,40].
Although female mice do not usually show territorial
aggression, those of a high aggression selection line showed
much more defensive burying than the females of the nonaggressive line, supporting the view that aggression is only
one of a larger set of behavioral characteristics that make up
the Hawk phenotype [30].
Field observations in wild house mice support the view
that fitness varies between the different behavioral phenotypes according to environmental conditions. Thus, low
aggressive male mice seem to be adapted to variable
conditions such as those encountered during migration,
whereas high aggressive male mice function better in stable
environments [41].
Clearly, the above-mentioned benefits of being a Hawk
or a Dove depend heavily on their biological role in a
population, the adopted behavioral strategy, the environmental context, food availability, and population cycle.
Hawks and Doves differ in emotional state, exploration
rates and energy metabolism that make them more or less
able to adapt to different environmental changes (Table 1).
Therefore, it is not surprising that the different behavioral
strategies require different underlying physiological mechanisms (see below). In the literature there is some
confusion about the dichotomy of behavioral phenotypes
[30] but clear bimodal distributions have been observed in
feral rodent and bird populations [24,42]. Recently, three
peaks in the frequency distribution of attack latency
emerged above a certain age in a population of 2500
laboratory-bred adult male wild-type rats [30,34]. The
existence of an intermediate group was explained by the
fact that there is little or no natural selection pressure in the
laboratory. In contrast, aggressive Hawk type individuals
appear to be missing from Wistar rat populations, probably
because these rats have been genetically selected for easy
handling [34].
Table 2
Differences between the neuroendocrine responses of Hawks and Doves to
acute threat
HPG-output (testosterone)
HPA-output
(cortisol or corticosterone)
Hypothalamus (CRF mRNA)
Hippocampus (MR mRNA)
Hippocampus (GR mRNA)
Pituitary (ACTH as % of
basal)
Adrenal cortex sensitivity
Neurosympathetic (NE)
Adrenomedullary (ECNE)
Parasympathetic (heart rate
variability)
Hawk
Dove
High
Low
Low
High
No response
No response, except
CA1[
No response
High
High
Low
No
response
High
Low
High
High
Low
High
Low
Medium
High
Table 3
Structural differences in the dorsal hippocampus of Hawks and Doves
Hawk
Dove
High
Low
High
Low
Small
Low
High
Low
High
Large
10
11
12
13
14
already shown that they differ in sympathetic and parasympathetic activation and glucocorticoid secretion, but
how does this affect immune functioning? From an
evolutionary viewpoint it is important to realize that the
central nervous system, circulating adrenal hormones,
behavioral processes and the immune system influence
each other in ways that are central to the survival and wellbeing of the organism in its natural environment [203209].
This was first recognized by Bob Ader in 1975, who showed
that both an antibody response to antigen [210] and the
immunosuppressive effects of a drug can be classically
conditioned [211]. Now, we know that hard wiring links
exist between nerve fibers of both the sympathetic and the
parasympathetic nervous system and the immune system.
Sympathetic noradrenergic nerve fibers innervate the
vasculature and parenchymal fields of lymphocytes and
associated cells in several lymphoid organs, including the
thymus, spleen, lymph nodes, gut-associated lymphoid
tissue and bone marrow, in a variety of mammalian species
[212]. However, the parasympathetic system, with its
neurotransmitter acetylcholine, also innervates the immune
system [213]. Perhaps the best known immune mediators,
circulating glucocorticoids, have now been recognized as
having biphasic effects upon immune function [208,209].
Remarkably, glucocorticoids may produce a Thelper1/
Thelper2 (Th1/Th2) shift, from cellular towards humoral
immunity because Th1-related cytokines (e.g. IL-2, IFNgamma) stimulate cellular immunity Th2-related cytokines
(e.g. IL-4) and enhance humoral immunity [205,214,215].
The Th1 response protects against infections (viruses, m.
tuberculosis, etc.) and tumors, while the Th2 response
protects against gastrointestinal parasites (e.g. helminths).
Communication in the other direction, i.e. from immune
system to brain, also takes place. The immune system
communicates with the brain via a neural and a humoral
pathway [216]. Recently, it became clear that cytokine
receptors also exist in the brain [217]. Previously, it was
shown that interleukin-1 (IL-1), IL-6 and TNF stimulate
HPA axis activity via an increase in CRF in the PVN [218,
219]. Interestingly, the immune system also evokes changes
in hypothalamic noradrenergic neurons and in hippocampal
serotonergic neurons [220]. Finally, the brain itself can
produce cytokines. Further, IL-1beta gene expression is
increased in brain cells and is specifically related to
hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP), a process
related to learning [221].
With the above mentioned findings it becomes much
easier to understand why differences in immune responses
between Hawks and Doves have been observed [222]. Due
to their different behavioral strategies Hawks and Doves are
confronted with different pathogens and Hawks are at
greater risk of wounding because of their aggressiveness
and boldness. It is speculated that increases in the levels of
catecholamines in Hawks result in elevated leukocyte
numbers in the blood, because it is known that catecholamines recruit the bodys soldiers, especially NK cells
15
cytokines originating from the choroid plexus and circumventricular organs and diffusing into the brain parenchyma
by volume transmission [216,228]. It is well accepted that
cytokines may produce sickness behavior, which is not a
maladaptive response, but rather an organized, evolved
behavioral strategy to facilitate the role of fever in
combating viral and bacterial infections [229]. It is thought
that immune overstimulation, which may lead to septic
shock, can be prevented through the vagus nerve pathway,
also named cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway. Via
this parasympathetic route rapid inhibition of release of the
macrophage TNF, IL-1beta, IL-6 and IL-18 takes place
[230232].
In summary, the Th1 dominated cellular immune
response of Hawks and the Th2 dominated humoral immune
response of Doves are very adaptive and biologically
sensible because Hawks are at greater risk of wounds and
infections during fighting, while Doves with their exploratory nature and greater intake of new resources are more
likely to be contaminated with parasites. However, a shift
towards Th1 can also incur other disadvantages and costs to
the body such as autoimmune disease, whereas a shift
towards Th2 is known to increase vulnerability to viruses.
Now that we have discussed one side of the coin, the
benefits of allostasis, we will continue with the flip side,
the costs of allostatic load, because together they produce
trade-offs in health and disease. We will discuss how
different personalities, such as the aggressive Hawk and the
non-aggressive Dove, each with associated differences in
underlying physiology and behavior, differ in their allostatic
load and vulnerability to stress-related diseases.
16
17
Table 4
Psychosocial challenges in various animal models produce an allostatic state reflected by temporal changes in hormone levels, neurotransmitters, receptor
numbers, etc
Sensory contact with dominant in non-aggressive mice
5 days
25 days
[
Y
Y
4
[
n.m.
7 days
n.m.
n.m.
4
Y
Y
[
n.m.
Y
Y
4
Y
21 days
Y
n.m.
Y
4
Y
1 day
Y
4
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
14 days
[
Y
Y
Y
[
2 days
[
n.m.
4
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
Y
4
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
Y
[
Y
[
[
10 days
[
n.m.
4
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
Y
4
Y
Y
n.m.
n.m.
n.m.
28 days
[
Y*
Y
Y
[
[
Y
Y
Y
Y
[
[
Y
Y
Definitions of acronyms: CeA, central nucleus of the amygdala; LA, lateral amygdala; LC, locus coeruleus; DG, dentate gyrus; CA1, cornu ammonis 1 (both
DG and CA1) are part of the hippocampus; PVN, paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus; MR, mineralocorticoid receptor; GR, glucocorticoid receptor;
CBG, corticosterone binding factor; SC, superior colliculus. [, increase; Y, decrease; 4, no difference; n.m., not measured.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Table 5
Different costs of adaptation in Hawks and Doves reflecting inefficient management of mediators of allostasis (e.g. decreased tonic 5-HT neurotransmission;
decreased negative feedback by blunted HPA axis reactivity; low parasympathetic counteractivation) and a too frequent release of mediators of allostasis (e.g.
increased 5-HT neurotransmission; increased glucocorticoid positive feedforward; high parasympathetic counteractivation), respectively
Costs of adaptation (allostatic load)
Hawk
Dove
responses have all been observed [450,452454]. Improvement in some patients during low-dose hydrocorticosterone
therapy has been reported and this also reversed the blunted
cortisol response to CRF [455].
Moreover, in atypical depression and chronic fatigue it
has been shown that corticosteroid (prednisone) augmentation may be useful [456]. There are some data suggesting
that hypoactivity of the HPA axis and hypofunction of CRF
neurons results in hyperimmune fatigue states such as
chronic fatigue syndrome and atypical depression, e.g.
seasonal affective disorder [341]. Atypical depression is
characterized by excessive sleepiness (hypersomnia; see
Table 5), increased food intake and weight gain; patients
also often feel walled off from themselves and they find
social contact too demanding and tiring [347]. Atypical
depression can be conceptualized as an allostatic state of
HPA axis hypoactivity with strong counter-regulatory
restraints. Theoretically, in patients with atypical depression
the left prefrontal cortex could be hyperactive leading to
excessive restraint of the right side (or defect in the right
side) and consequently hypoactivity of amygdala and LC
[347]. A more active prefrontal cortex may also be involved
in the lessening of anxiety. It was suggested that the dorsal
region of the medial prefrontal cortex produces a general
decrease in fear reactivity (freezing responses) in response
to fear conditioning during both the acquisition and
extinction phases [457], and that the medial prefrontal
cortex may also be involved in the extinction of conditioned
freezing in rats, via the formation of a memory of safety
[458]. It is thought that the medial prefrontal cortex gates
impulse transmission from the basolateral amygdala to
central amygdala (CeA), thereby gating the expression of
conditioned fear via feedforward inhibition [458]. The
above mentioned mechanisms produce a hypoactive
amygdala and LC and this may lead to lower central CRF
anxiety levels but also to a hyperimmune system [341,347].
Recently, the possible involvement of cytokines in
depression and in chronic fatigue syndrome has drawn the
attention of many researchers. This is because the
administration of the cytokines interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) and interleukin-2 (IL-2) which are used for the
treatment of various viral illnesses, such as hepatitis C and
various forms of cancer in humans, induce neuropsychiatric
26
effects, including depression, fatigue, anorexia and anhedonia [217,228,459]. In animals it is generally accepted that
proinflammatory cytokines, such as IL-1beta, IFN-alpha,
IFN-gamma and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha)
induce sickness behavior which might resemble the
vegetative symptoms of depression in humans [216,217].
Direct activation of neurons by slowly diffusing IL-1beta
takes place in the basolateral amygdala and nucleus
parabrachialis, which both project to the CEA to mediate
behavioral depression [228]. It has been suggested that
repeated immune stimulation also makes the brain more
sensitive to other classes of stimuli, a phenomenon known
as cross-sensitization [216].
Growing evidence suggests that cytokines produce the
above mentioned effects via changes in the neural 5-HT
system. Cytokines like IFN-gamma and IFN-alpha induce
the enzyme indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase which has various
negative consequences for the brain [217,228,459460].
First, this enzyme converts tryptophan along the kynurenine
pathway into several neuroactive intermediates and then
into kynurenine; this chain of events results in reduced
levels of tryptophan, the precursor of 5-HT, and thus to
reduced central 5-HT synthesis. Second, kynurenine
metabolites such as 3-hydroxy-kynurenine and quinolinic
acid have toxic effects on brain function; The former
metabolite can lead to oxidative stress by increasing the
production of reactive oxygen species, while quinolinic acid
may produce overstimulation of hippocampal N-methyl-Daspartate (NMDA) receptors and thereby lead to apoptosis
and hippocampal atrophy [216,228]. Indeed, hippocampal
atrophy can be caused by NMDA overstimulation and this
has been associated with depression [461]. Accumulating
evidence suggests that the above mechanisms take place in
humans because lower tryptophan values, associated with
significantly higher IFN-gamma secretion, have been
observed during major depression [462]. Moreover; (a)
antidepressants (especially selective serotonin reuptake
inhibitors such as paroxetine) are effective in reducing
IFN-induced depression [463] and (b) in major depression
reductions in tryptophan correlate with depressive, anxious,
and cognitive symptoms but not with neurovegetative or
somatic ones [464].
In summary, returning to our central theme, in Hawks
with their hypoactive HPA axis there is evidence that a Th1
cellular immune response dominates, while in Doves a Th2
dominated humoral immune response is observed. Therefore, it is assumed that although they are more resistant to
infections, the trade-off in Hawks is that they are more
vulnerable to autoimmune diseases, atypical depression and
chronic fatigue. The lower parasympathetic reactivity found
in Hawks also suggests that they are less well equipped to
inhibit the release of macrophage TNF, IL-1beta, IL-6 and
IL-18 via the vagal parasympathetic route; the release of
these cytokines may then produce sickness behavior and
chronic fatigue. In contrast, Doves are better equipped to
combat parasites, but the trade-off for them may be a higher
5. Conclusions
With the exception of the past few thousand years, a
drop in the bucket of evolutionary time, humans and
animals have evolved in natural habitats and are therefore
intricately tied to nature. It has become clear that natural
selection maintains a balance of different traits, e.g.
preserving genes for high aggression (Hawks) and low
aggression (Doves) within a population. The existence of
the HawkDove strategy is widespread in the animal
kingdom, not only between males and females, but also
within the same gender across species. Both behavioral
strategies can be successful, but under different environmental conditions. Bold Hawks preferentially adopt the
fightflight strategy when attempting to establish a new
territory or to defend an existing territory, while cautious
Doves adopt the freezehide strategy to avoid to threats in
their environment. The fitness of Hawks is increased when
the population density is high and food availability is stable
and abundant. In contrast, Doves have an increased fitness
during food scarcity and low population density because
they explore their environment more thoroughly for new
resources and they have greater behavioral flexibility.
Hawks and Doves have their own specific underlying
physiological characteristics that lead to differences in the
trade-offs between the various benefits of allostasis and
costs of allostatic load (Table 5).
The cost benefit analysis of the Hawk and Dove
strategies is summarized below (A to D).
(A1) Bold Hawks with their relatively low corticosteroid
levels, high testosterone and high DHEA concentrations have a higher motivation to express aggressive behavior, but the trade-off is an increased
incidence of antisocial and violent behavior. The
presence of low tonic 5-HT neurotransmission in
Hawks may produce less anxiety but it increases the
risk of impulse control disorders.
(A2) In contrast, cautious Doves with their high levels of
HPA axis reactivity, corticosteroids, and tonic 5-HT
neurotransmission have a higher motivation to
express orienting and freezing behavior. Freezing
behavior itself may reduce the likelihood of detection
and attack from an attacker or predator. Further, if
caught, freezing or tonic immobility responses may
result in the predator or attacker losing interest and
moving away [466]. In combination with their
(B1)
(B2)
(C1)
(C2)
(D1)
27
Acknowledgements
We thank Dr Bryan Jones for helpful criticism of the
manuscript.
References
[1] Selye H. What is stress? Metabolism 1956;5:52530.
[2] McEwen B, Lasley EN. The end of stress ass we know it. New York:
Joseph Henry Press; 2002.
[3] Tausk M. Hat die Nebenniere tatsachlich eine Verteidigungsfunktion? Das Hormon (Organon Holland) 1951;3:124.
[4] McEwen BS. Protective and damaging effects of stress. N Engl
J Med 1998;338:1719.
[5] McEwen BS, Stellar E. Stress and the individual: mechanisms
leading to disease. Arch Int Med 1993;153:2093101.
[6] McEwen BS. Effects of adverse experiences for brain structure and
function. Biol Psychiatry 2000;48:72131.
[7] McEwen BS, Wingfield JC. The concept of allostasis in biology and
biomedicine. Horm Behav 2003;43:215.
[8] Sterling P, Eyer J. Allostasis: a new paradigm to explain arousal
pathology. In: Fisher S, Reason J, editors. Handbook of life stress,
cognition and health. New York: Wiley; 1988. p. 62949.
[9] Koob GF, LeMoal M. Drug addiction, dysregulation of reward, and
allostasis. Neuropsychopharmacology 2001;24:97129.
[10] Darwin C. On the origin of the species by means of natural selection,
or, the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London:
John Murray; 1859.
[11] Nesse R. Proximate and evolutionary studies of anxiety, stress and
depression: synergy at the interface Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1999;
23:895903.
[12] Nesse RM. Is depression an adaptation? Arch Gen Psychiatry 2000;
57:1420.
28
29
30
[97] Diamond DM, Park CR, Heman KL, Rose GM. Exposing rats to a
predator impairs spatial working memory in the radial arm water
maze. Hippocampus 1999;9:54252.
[98] Pugh CR, Fleshner M, Rudy JW. Type II glucocorticoid receptor
antagonists impair contextual but not auditory-cue fear conditioning
in juvenile rats. Neurobiol Learn Mem 1997;67:759.
[99] De Kloet ER, Vreugdenhil E, Oitzl MS, Joels M. Brain corticosteroid
receptor balance in health and disease. Endocr Rev 1998;19:
269301.
[100] De Kloet ER, Oitzl MS, Joels M. Stress and cognition: are
corticosteroids good or bad guys? Trends Neurosci 1999;22:4226.
[101] Joels M, de Kloet ER. Effects of glucocorticoids and norepinephrine
on the excitability in the hippocampus. Science 1989;245:15025.
[102] Kerr DS, Campbell LW, Hao SY, Landfield PW. Corticosteroid
modulation of hippocampal potentials: increased effect with aging.
Science 1989;245:15059.
[103] Joels M, Hesen W, de Kloet ER. Mineralocorticoid hormones
suppress serotonin-induced hyperpolarization of rat hippocampal
CA1 neurons. J Neurosci 1991;11:228894.
[104] Diamond JM, Bennett MC, Fleshner M, Rose GM. InvertedU
relationship between the level of peripheral corticosterone and the
magnitude of hippocampal primed burst potentiation. Hippocampus
1992;2:42130.
[105] Joels M, de Kloet ER. Corticosteroid actions on amino acidmediated transmission in rat CA1 hippocampal cells. J Neurosci
1993;13:408290.
[106] Beck SG, List TJ, Choi KC. Long- and short-term administration of
corticosterone alters CA1 hippocampal neuronal properties. Neuroendocrinology 1994;60:26172.
[107] Azmitia EC, McEwen BS. Adrenalcortical influence on rat brain
tryptophan hydroxylase activity. Brain Res 1974;78:291302.
[108] Boadle-Biber MC, Corley KC, Graves L, Phan T-H, Rosecrans J.
Increase in the activity of tryptophan hydroxylase from cortex and
midbrain of male Fischer 344 rats in response to acute or repeated
sound stress. Brain Res 1989;482:30616.
[109] Singh VB, Corley KC, Phan T-H, Boadle-Biber MC. Increases in the
activity of tryptophan hydroxylase from rat cortex and midbrain in
response to acute or repeated sound stress are blocked by
adrenalectomy and restored by dexamethasone treatment. Brain
Res 1990;516:6676.
[110] Shimizu N, Take S, Hori T, Oomura Y. In vivo measurement of
hypothalamic serotonin release by intracerebral microdialysis:
significant enhancement by immobilization stress in rats. Brain
Res Bull 1992;28:72734.
[111] Summers CH, Larson ET, Ronan PJ, Hofmann PM, Emerson AJ,
Renner KJ. Serotonergic responses to corticosterone and testosterone
in the limbic system. Gen Comp Endocrinol 2000;117(1):1519.
[112] Singh VB, Corley KC, Krieg RJ, Phan T-H, Boadle-Biber MC.
Sound stress activation of tryptophan hydroxylase blocked by
hypophysectomy and intracanial RU 38486. Eur J Pharmacol 1994;
256:17784.
[113] Azmitia EZ, McEwen BS. Corticosterone regulation of tryptophan
hydroxylase in midbrain of the rat. Science 1969;166:12746.
[114] Azmitia EZ, Liao B, Chen Y-S. Increase of tryptophan hydroxylase
enzyme protein by dexamethasone in adrenalectomized rat midbrain.
J Neurosci 1993;13:504155.
[115] Korte-Bouws GAH, Korte SM, De Kloet ER, Bohus B. Blockade of
corticosterone synthesis reduces serotonin turnover in the dorsal
hippocampus of the rat as measured by microdialysis.
J Neuroendocrinol 1996;11:87781.
[116] Roozendaal B, Bohus B, McGaugh JL. Dose-dependent suppression
of adrenocortical activity with metyrapone: effects on emotion and
memory. Psychoneuroendocrinology 1996;21:68193.
[117] Laaris N, Haj-Dahmane S, Hamon M, Lanfumey L. Glucocorticoid
receptor-mediated inhibition by corticosterone of 5-HT1A autoreceptor functioning in the rat dorsal raphe nucleus. Neuropharmacology 1995;34:120110.
31
32
[183] Tempel DL, McEwen BS, Leibowitz SF. Effects of adrenal steroid
agonists on food intake and macronutrient selection. Physiol Behav
1992;52:11616.
[184] Tempel DL, McEwen BS, Leibowitz SF. Adrenal steroid receptors in
the PVN: studies with steroid antagonists in relation to macronutrient
intake. Neuroendocrinology 1993;57:110613.
[185] Tempel DL, Leibowitz SF. Adrenal steroid receptors: interactions
with brain neuropeptide systems in relation to nutrient intake and
metabolism. J Neuroendocrinol 1994;6:479501.
[186] Neel JV. Diabetes mellitus: a thrifty genotype rendered detrimental
by progress? Am J Hum Genet 1962;14:35362.
[187] Neel JV. Lessons from a primitive people. Science 1970;170:
81522.
[188] Epel E, Lapidus R, McEwen B, Brownell K. Stress may add bite to
appetite in women: a laboratory study of stress-induced cortisol and
eating behavior. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2001;26:3749.
[189] Cusin I, Rouru J, Rohner-Jeanrenaud F. Intracerebroventricular
glucocorticoid infusion in normal rats: induction of parasympatheticmediated obesity and insulin resistance. Obes Res 2001;9:4016.
[190] Keay KA, Bandler R. Anatomical evidence for segregated input
from the upper cervical spinal cord to functionally distinct regions of
the periaqueductal gray region of the cat. Neurosci Lett 1992;139:
1438.
[191] Schiller PH, Koerner F. Discharge characteristics of single units in
superior colliculus of the alertrhesus monkey. J Neurophysiol 1971;
34:92036.
[192] Dean P, Redgrave P, Westby GW. Event or emergency? Two
response systems in the mammalian superior colliculus Trends
Neurosci 1989;12:13747.
[193] Ingle D. Focal attention in the frog: behavioral and physiological
correlates. Science 1975;188:10335.
[194] Korte SM, Jaarsma D, Luiten PG, Bohus B. Mesencephalic
cuneiform nucleus and its ascending and descending projections
serve stress-related cardiovascular responses in the rat. J Auton Nerv
Syst 1992;41:15776.
[195] Korte SM, Buwalda B, Bouws GA, Koolhaas JM, Maes FW,
Bohus B. Conditioned neuroendocrine and cardiovascular stress
responsiveness accompanying behavioral passivity and activity in
aged and in young rats. Physiol Behav 1992;51:81522.
[196] Keay KA, Bandler R. Parallel circuits mediating distinct emotional
coping reactions to different types of stress. Neurosci Biobehav Rev
2001;25:66978.
[197] Engel GL, Schmale AH. Conservation withdrawal: a primary
regulatory process for organic homeostasis. Physiology, emotions
and psychosomatic illness. New York: Elsevier; 1972 p. 5795.
[198] Porges SW. Cardiac vagal tone: a physiological index of stress.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1995;19:22533.
[199] Porges SW. Orienting in a defensive world: mammalian modifications of our evolutionary heritage. A polyvagal theory. Psychophysiology 1995;32:30118.
[200] Porges SW. Emotion: an evolutionary by-product of the neural
regulation of the autonomic nervous system. Annu NY Acad Sci
1997;807:6277.
[201] Porges SW, Doussard-Roosevelt JA, Stifter CA, McClenny BD,
Riniolo TC. Sleep state and vagal regulation of heart period patterns
in the human newborn: an extension of the polyvagal theory.
Psychophysiology 1999;36:1421.
[202] Buwalda B, Nyakas C, Koolhaas JM, Luiten PG, Bohus B.
Vasopressin prolongs behavioral and cardiac responses to mild
stress in young but not in aged rats. Physiol Behav 1992;52:112731.
[203] Ader R, Cohen N. Psychoneuroimmunology: interactions between
the nervous system and the immune system. Lancet 1995;349:
99103.
[204] Elenkov IJ, Wilder RL, Chrousos GP, Vizi ES. The sympathetic
nervean integrative interface between two supersystems: the brain
and the immune system. Pharmacol Rev 2000;52:595638.
[205] Dhabhar FS, Miller AH, McEwen BS, Spencer RL. Effects of stress
on immune cell distribution: dynamics and hormonal mechanisms.
J Immunol 1995;154:551127.
[206] Dhabhar FS, McEwen BS. Stress-induced enhancement of antigenspecific cell-mediated immunity. J Immunol 1996;156:260815.
[207] Dhabhar FS, Satoskar AR, Bluethmann H, David JR, McEwen BS.
Stress-induced enhancement of skin immune function: a role for
interferon. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000;97:2284651.
[208] Dhabhar FS, McEwen BS. Acute stress enhances while chronic
stress suppresses cell-mediated immunity in vivo: a potential role for
leukocyte trafficking. Brain Behav Immun 1997;11:286306.
[209] Dhabhar FS, McEwen BS. Enhancing versus suppressive effects of
stress hormones on skin immune function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
1999;96105964.
[210] Ader R, Cohen N. Behaviorally conditioned immunosuppression.
Psychosom Med 1975;37:33340.
[211] Ader R, Cohen N. Behaviourally conditioned immunosuppression
and murine systemic lupus erythematosus. Science 1982;215:
15346.
[212] Felten DL, Felten SY, Carlson SL, Olschowka JA, Livnat S.
Noradrenergic and peptidergic innervation of lymphoid tissue.
J Immunol 1985;135:755s765.
[213] Bulloch K, Pomerantz W. Autonomic nervous system innervation of
thymic-related lymphoid tissue in wildtype and nude mice. J Comp
Neurol 1984;228:5768.
[214] Elenkov IJ, Chrousos GP. Stress hormones, Th1/Th2 patterns,
Pro/Anti-inflammatory cytokines and susceptibility to disease.
Trends Endocrinol Metab 1999;10:35968.
[215] Sternberg EM. Neuroendocrine regulation of autoimmune/inflammatory disease. J Endocrinol 2001;169:42935.
[216] Dantzer R. Cytokine-induced sickness behavior: where do we stand?
Brain Behav Immun 2001;15:724.
[217] Kronfol Z, Remick DG. Cytokines and the brain: implications for
clinical psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry 2000;157:68394.
[218] Besedovsky H, del Rey A, Sorkin E, Dinarello CA. Immunoregulatory feedback between interleukin-1 and glucocorticoid hormones.
Science 1986;233:6524.
[219] Besedovsky H, del Rey A, Sorkin E, Da Prada M, Burri R,
Honegger C. The immune response evokes changes in brain
noradrenergic neurons. Science 1983;221:5646.
[220] Linthorst AC, Flachskamm C, Holsboer F, Reul JM. Activation of
serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission in the hippocampus after peripheral administration of bacterial endotoxin:
involvement of the cyclo-oxygenase pathway. Neuroscience 1996;
72:98997.
[221] Schneider H, Pitossi F, Balschun D, Wagner A, del Rey A,
Besedovsky HO. A neuromodulatory role of interleukin-1beta in the
hippocampus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998;95:777883.
[222] Hessing MJ, Coenen GJ, Vaiman M, Renard C. Individual
differences in cell-mediated and humoral immunity in pigs. Vet
Immunol Immunopathol 1995;45:97113.
[223] Bolhuis JE, Parmentier HK, Schouten WG, Schrama JW,
Wiegant VM. Effects of housing and individual coping characteristics on immune responses of pigs. Physiol Behav 2003;79:28996.
[224] Schrama JW, Schouten JM, Swinkels JW, Gentry JL, de Vries
Reilingh G, Parmentier HK. Effect of hemoglobin status on humoral
immune response of weanling pigs differing in coping styles. J Anim
Sci 1997;75:258896.
[225] Kavelaars A, Heijnen CJ, Ellenbroek B, van Loveren H, Cools A.
Apomorphine-susceptible and apomorphine-unsusceptible Wistar
rats differ in their susceptibility to inflammatory and infectious
diseases: a study on rats with group-specific differences in structure
and reactivity of hypothalamicpituitaryadrenal axis. J Neurosci
1997;17:25804.
[226] Dhabhar FS, Miller AH, McEwen BS, Spencer RL. Stress-induced
changes in blood leukocyte distribution. Role of adrenal steroid
hormones. J Immunol 1996;157:163844.
33
34
[268] Fuchs E, Flugge G. Modulation of binding sites for corticotropinreleasing hormone by chronic psychosocial stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology 1995;20:3351.
[269] Flugge G, Van Kampen M, Mijnster MJ. Perturbations in brain
monoamine systems during stress. Cell Tissue Res 2004;315:
114.
[270] Magarinos AM, McEwen BS, Flugge G, Fuchs E. Chronic
psychosocial stress causes apical dendritic atrophy of hippocampal
CA3 pyramidal neurons in subordinate tree shrews. J Neurosci 1996;
16:353440.
[271] Gould E, McEwen BS, Tanapat P, Galea LAM, Fuchs E.
Neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus of the adult tree shrew is regulated
by psychosocial stress and NMDA receptor activation. J Neurosci
1997;17:24928.
[272] Gould E, Tanapat P, Rydel T, Hastings N. Regulation of
hippocampal neurogenesis in adulthood. Biol Psychiatry 2000;48:
71520.
[273] Czeh B, Michaelis T, Watanabe T, Frahm J, de Biurrun G, van
Kampen M, et al. Stress-induced changes in cerebral metabolites,
hippocampal volume and cell proliferation are prevented by
antidepressant treatment with tianeptine. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
2001;98:12796801.
[274] Van der Hart MG, Czeh B, de Biurrun G, Michaelis T, Watanabe T,
Natt O, et al. Substance P receptor antagonist and clomipramine
prevent stress-induced alterations in cerebral metabolites, cytogenesis in the dentate gyrus and hippocampal volume. Mol Psychiatry
2002;7:93341.
[275] Lucassen PJ, Fuchs E, Czeh B. Antidepressant treatment with
tianeptine reduces apoptosis in the hippocampal dentate gyrus and
temporal cortex. Biol Psychiatry 2004;55:78996.
[276] Van Kampen M, Kramer M, Hiemke C, Flugge G, Fuchs E. The
chronic psychosocial stress paradigm in male tree shrews: evaluation
of a novel animal model for depressive disorders. Stress 2002;5:
3746.
[277] Schweiger U, Deuschle M, Weber B, Korner A, Lammers CH,
Schmider J, et al. Testosterone, gonadotropin, and cortisol secretion
in male patients with major depression. Psychosom Med 1999;61:
2926.
[278] Sapolsky RM. Stress-induced elevation of testosterone concentration
in high ranking baboons: role of catecholamines. Endocrinology
1986;118:16305.
[279] Price JS. The dominance hierarchy and the evolution of mental
illness. Lancet 1967;2:2436.
[280] Price J, Sloman L, Gardner R, Gilbert R, Rohde P. The social
competition hypothesis of depression. Br J Psychiatry 1994;64:
30915.
[281] Lopez JF, Chalmers DT, Little KY, Watson SJ. A.E. Bennett
research award. Regulation of serotonin1A, glucocorticoid, and
mineralocorticoid receptor in rat and human hippocampus: implications for the neurobiology of depression. Biol Psychiatry 1998;43:
54773.
[282] Herman JP, Spencer R. Regulation of hippocampal glucocorticoid
receptor gene transcription and protein expression in vivo.
J Neurosci 1998;18:746273.
[283] Spencer RL, Miller A, Stein MH, McEwen BS. Corticosterone
regulation of type I and type II adrenal steroid receptors inbrain,
pituitary, and immune tissue. Brain Res 1991;549:23646.
[284] Arriza JL, Simerly RB, Swanson LW, Evans RM. The neuronal
mineralocorticoid receptor as a mediator of glucocorticoid response.
Neuron 1988;1:887900.
[285] Sandi C, Rose SP. Corticosteroid receptor antagonists are amnestic
for passive avoidance learning in day-old chicks. Eur J Neurosci
1994;6:12927.
[286] Sandi C. The role and mechanisms of action of glucocorticoid
involvement in memory storage. Neural Plast 1998;6:4152.
35
36
37
38