Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Radiat Res. 2016 Dec 1;186(6):614–623. doi: 10.1667/RR14530.1

Neurogenic Effects of Low-Dose Whole-Body HZE (Fe) Ion and Gamma Irradiation

Tara B Sweet a, Sean D Hurley a, Michael D Wu a, John A Olschowka a, Jacqueline P Williams b,c, M Kerry O’Banion a,d,1
PMCID: PMC5240657  NIHMSID: NIHMS839860  PMID: 27905869

Abstract

Understanding the dose-toxicity profile of radiation is critical when evaluating potential health risks associated with natural and man-made sources in our environment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of low-dose whole-body high-energy charged (HZE) iron (Fe) ions and low-energy gamma exposure on proliferation and differentiation of adult-born neurons within the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, cells deemed to play a critical role in memory regulation. To determine the dose-response characteristics of the brain to whole-body Fe-ion vs. gamma-radiation exposure, C57BL/6J mice were irradiated with 1 GeV/n Fe ions or a static 137Cs source (0.662 MeV) at doses ranging from 0 to 300 cGy. The neurogenesis was analyzed at 48 h and one month postirradiation. These experiments revealed that whole-body exposure to either Fe ions or gamma radiation leads to: 1. An acute decrease in cell division within the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, detected at doses as low as 30 and 100 cGy for Fe ions and gamma radiation, respectively; and 2. A reduction in newly differentiated neurons (DCX immunoreactivity) at one month postirradiation, with significant decreases detected at doses as low as 100 cGy for both Fe ions and gamma rays. The data presented here contribute to our understanding of brain responses to whole-body Fe ions and gamma rays and may help inform health-risk evaluations related to systemic exposure during a medical or radiologic/nuclear event or as a result of prolonged space travel.

INTRODUCTION

Humans are exposed to low-dose or low-fluence ionizing radiation from natural and man-made sources in our environment, including cosmic and terrestrial radiation, medical procedures and occupational exposure (1). For decades, there has been extensive research on the health effects of such exposures, using standard epidemiological and toxicological approaches, which endeavors to establish exposure limits that will protect the public and relevant worker populations from adverse radiation effects, such as radiation-associated carcinogenesis. In general, the research approach has been to characterize responses of both populations and individuals to high-dose radiation and then, as appropriate, combine those data with quality factors, relative biological effectiveness factors and dose-rate modifiers derived from experimental models (2). However, despite this body of work, the health risks from low-dose radiation, such as the uncontrolled release from the Fukushima nuclear power plant (3) or long-duration space missions (4, 5), remain poorly determined. Of particular concern to the space industry are the effects of low-dose, high-energy cosmic radiation on the central nervous system (CNS). It has been suggested that these may include altered cognitive and emotional function, as well as detriments in short-term memory, reduced motor function and behavioral changes, outcomes that could affect mission astronaut performance and health; potential later effects include an increased risk of neurological disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease or other dementias (6).

Importantly, when determining radiation risk, especially at low doses, there is a need to understand which cells and functions are vulnerable to radiation injury. For example, in humans, the generation of new neurons (neurogenesis), occurs within the hippocampus throughout adulthood (7, 8). Although it is difficult to assess its contribution in humans, evidence in rodent studies suggests that adult hippocampal neurogenesis contributes to both cognitive function and emotional regulation (913). For example, selective suppression of adult neurogenesis impairs performance of cognitive tasks (1422), abrogates the behavioral effects of antidepressant medications (23, 24) and impairs response to stress (2528). Given the proliferative aspects of this critical function, it is not surprising that there is a significant body of evidence linking radiation exposure of the CNS to cognitive and emotional dysfunction in humans and mice (13, 26, 27, 2935). Therefore, since radiation exposure of the hippocampus specifically may contribute to these cognitive deficits (29, 31), we have focused on the effects of radiation on hippocampal neurogenic end points. Furthermore, while the ability of localized irradiation to inhibit neurogenesis is evident (30, 3641), the existence or significance of a dose-response relationship of neurogenesis in the context of whole-body irradiation at low doses is less clear and was a primary focus of this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Animals

Male C57BL/6J mice (N = 260) were purchased from Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME) and shipped to Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL; Upton, NY) to acclimate for one week before entering the study. Animals were irradiated at 8–10 weeks of age and either sacrificed at 48 h or shipped to the University of Rochester (Rochester, NY), where they were housed until euthanized at one month postirradiation. In general, mice were housed five per cage and kept on a 12:12 h light-dark schedule in a temperature-controlled environment (23 ± 3°C) with access to food and water ad libitum. Mice were routinely monitored for health issues and had no observable problems at the time of euthanasia. All studies were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees of the University of Rochester and BNL.

Irradiations

Animals received Fe-ions or gamma whole-body irradiation at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory and the Gamma Radiation Source Facility, respectively, at BNL. Due to logistical necessity, mice were exposed to Fe ions and gamma rays in two different runs, but variables including housing and handling conditions were minimized as much as possible.

The Fe-ion irradiation setup and dosing have been described elsewhere (42). Briefly, awake mice were loaded into ventilated 50 ml polystyrene conical tubes and irradiated, 10 at a time, using a foam tube holder positioned perpendicular to the center of a 20 × 20 cm beam of 56Fe ions accelerated to 1 GeV/n. For a 1 GeV/n Fe beam, the field is uniform ±2%. Doses were delivered at 1, 3, 10, 30 or 100 cGy, with dose rates ranging from 1 to 100 cGy/min. Control mice were similarly placed in tubes and sham irradiated. A total of 120 mice were used in this experiment with a group size of 20 for each dose.

For gamma-ray exposures, awake mice in their home cages were placed at various distances from a static 137Cs source. The Biology Department at BNL maintains and calibrates the dose rate of this source. Doses of 1, 3, 10, 30, 100 or 300 cGy were delivered at dose rates ranging from 2 to 27 cGy/min. A control group of mice was placed in the source room but not irradiated. A total of 140 mice were used in this experiment with 20 mice per group for each dose.

Bromodeoxyuridine Injections

Animals destined for histological examination at the 48 h and one month postirradiation time points were injected intraperitoneally with 75 mg/kg bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU, Sigma-Aldrich® LLC, St. Louis, MO). Animals received four injections at 2 h intervals, starting at 2 h postirradiation.

Tissue Collection

Mice were euthanized at 48 h or one month postirradiation for histological analysis (9–10 mice for each dose and time point). At each time point, animals were deeply anesthetized using a mixture of ketamine (50 mg) and xylazine (10 mg) before performing transcardial perfusion via the left ventricle. A perfusate containing 0.15 M phosphate buffer (PB) with 0.5% w/v sodium nitrite and 2 IU/ml heparin was flushed through each animal to dilate blood vessels and prevent clotting. This was followed by perfusion with approximately 50 ml of freshly made, ice-cold 4% paraformaldehyde (00380; Polysciences Inc., Warrington, PA) in 0.15 M PB, pH 7.2. Brains were carefully removed, immersion fixed for 2 h at 4°C, dehydrated overnight in 30% sucrose in 0.15 M PB, snap frozen using dry ice and isopentane and stored at −80°C until sectioned. Brains were sectioned coronally (random initiation) to a thickness of 30 µm on a sliding microtome and free-floating sections stored in cryoprotectant until assayed.

Immunohistochemical Staining

Systematic random sampled sections of the brain from each mouse at each time point and dose were washed in 0.15 M PB, reacted in 3% H2O2 and blocked with 3% rabbit serum (Gibco®, Carlsbad, CA) with 0.4% Triton™ X-100 (Sigma-Aldrich). For examination of BrdU incorporation, brain sections were subject to an antigen retrieval process prior to primary antibody incubation. Briefly, sections were mounted on slides and allowed to dry overnight, then incubated in 4 N HCl for 30 min at room temperature. Trypsin treatment (0.1% in 0.15 M PB for 10 min at 37°C) further improved antigen retrieval. Sections were then incubated with primary antibody: rat anti-BrdU (ab6326; Abcam®, Cambridge, MA) diluted at 1:300. For examination of Doublecortin (DCX) immunoreactivity, staining of free-floating sections was performed using goat anti-DCX antibody (sc-8066; Santa Cruz, Dallas, TX) diluted at 1:1,000. DCX antigen retrieval was performed by incubating 20 min at room temperature in liberate antibody binding (L.A.B.) solution (Polysciences). Antibody staining was visualized using biotinylated secondary antibodies (Vector Laboratories. Burlingame, CA or Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories Inc., West Grove, PA), diluted at 1:2,000 or 1:4,000, respectively, Elite® avidin-biotin complex (PK-6100) and a 3,3-diaminobenxadine (DAB, SK-4100) substrate kit (Vector Laboratories). Sections were cover slipped with DPX (13512; Electron Microscopy Sciences, Hatfield, PA).

Immunohistochemical Analysis

All analyses were performed blinded to treatment on sections taken at regular intervals from the brain (every 24th section). For counting BrdU-immunopositive (BrdU+) cells, sections were viewed with an Axiophot microscope, and light microscope images of representative sections were captured on an Axioplan IIi microscope (both from Carl Zeiss Microscopy, Jena, Germany). BrdU+ cells were counted in the subgranular zone (SGZ)/granule cell layer (GCL) in all brain tissue sections stained for each animal at both time points (4–5 sections per animal). For each radiation type, data were calculated as the percentage of the number of BrdU+ cells at 48 h in the sham-irradiated animals.

For counting DCX+ cells, sections were viewed on a Zeiss Axioplan IIi microscope and DCX+ cells in the SGZ/GCL were counted in the first two sections of brain tissue containing both blades of the dentate gyrus. For area calculations, light microscope images of each hemisphere of the first hippocampal section containing both blades of the dentate sections were captured at 10× magnification. From each image, the area corresponding to the SGZ/GCL was determined using ImageJ Software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD). Data are displayed as a percentage of the number of DCX+ cells per 0.1 mm2 in the sham-irradiated sample for each radiation type. Images of representative sections were captured at 10× magnification.

Statistics

The D’Agostino-Pearson omnibus test or, under conditions when the N was small, the Shapiro-Wilk test, was used to confirm the normality of the data. Bartlett’s test was used to assess homoscedasticity of the data. ANOVA analysis and Dunnett’s post hoc tests were used when required assumptions were met. For situations of unequal variance, Welch’s ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests were used. Statistical computation and graph creation was performed in JMP statistical software, version 5 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) and GraphPad Prism, version 6 (GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego, CA). Statistical significance was considered at P ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Acute (48 h) Effects of Whole-Body Fe Ions vs. Gamma Rays on BrdU Labeling

Neurogenesis persists in the adult mouse hippocampus, with new neurons arising from the proliferation of neural stem cells and intermediate progenitor cells that reside in the SGZ in the dentate gyrus (7, 43). To determine whether whole-body exposure to either Fe ions or gamma rays affected neurogenesis, we assessed BrdU labeling at 48 h and one month postirradiation. At 48 h, radiation-induced apoptosis of adult-born dentate gyrus cells is generally complete (44, 45), and at one month, adult-born dentate gyrus cells have achieved a stage of maturation such that they could have a functional influence on the dentate gyrus network (46). Across the brain, the cells that had incorporated BrdU were detected predominantly in neurogenic regions and, within the hippocampus itself, BrdU+ cells were detected in the SGZ along both blades of the dentate gyrus and, occasionally, in the hilus and GCL near the SGZ (Fig. 1A–D).

FIG. 1.

FIG. 1

Acute response of BrdU+ cells 48 h after whole-body irradiation at a range of doses (0–300 cGy). Panels A–D: Representative images of BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus of irradiated mice 48 h after sham or 100 cGy Fe-ion or gamma irradiation. Scale bar = 100 µm. Panels E and F: Graphs of BrdU+ cells 48 h after Fe-ion or gamma irradiation. The responses are presented as the percentage of the average number of BrdU+ cells detected in the corresponding sham-irradiated mice at 48 h postirradiation. Error bars represent SEM. N = 9–10 mice per dose. Data were analyzed with Welch’s ANOVA followed by Games-Howell post hoc tests. *Significant effects are reported at a threshold of P < 0.05.

To quantify effects on proliferation, BrdU+ cells were counted throughout the dentate gyrus. Figure 1E shows a dose-dependent decline in the number of BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus at 48 h after high-energy charged (HZE) irradiation. Welch’s ANOVA comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of radiation dose on the number of BrdU+ cells in the hippocampus [F(5,23) = 123.50, P < 0.0001]; Games-Howell post hoc tests revealed significant effects at doses of 30 cGy and higher (30 cGy: 66 ± 12; 100 cGy: 22 ± 5) compared to controls (0 cGy: 100 ± 22). Although a trend towards lower numbers was indicated in the low-dose groups, the reductions were not significant. As a comparison with the effects of whole-body Fe ion irradiation, Fig. 1F shows the quantification of the BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus of mice 48 h after whole-body gamma irradiation. Again, Welch’s ANOVA comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of radiation dose on the number of BrdU+ cells in the hippocampus [F(6,22) = 300.36, P < 0.0001]. However, Games-Howell post hoc test revealed a significant effect only at doses of 100 cGy and greater (100 cGy: 45 ± 16; 300 cGy: 6 ± 2) compared to controls (0 cGy: 100 ± 13).

Delayed (One Month) Effects of Whole-Body Fe Ions vs. Gamma Rays on BrdU Labeling

The acute study showed a substantial loss of proliferating cells after whole-body irradiation with either gamma rays or Fe ions. However, even after 100 cGy irradiation with either type, ≥20% of the BrdU+ cells appeared to be viable and, indeed, BrdU+ cells persisted in the SGZ at one month postirradiation (Fig. 2A–D). To quantify these surviving cells and their progeny, we counted BrdU+ cells throughout the dentate and SGZ at one month postirradiation; data are shown for each radiation type as a percentage of the number of BrdU+ cells detected with respect to the sham-irradiated animals at the 48 h time point. Figure 2E shows the BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus of male mice at one month after whole-body Fe-ion irradiation. ANOVA comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of Fe-ion radiation on the number of BrdU+ cells; this included the 0 Gy cohort, which displayed significant age-related attrition of adult-born neurons, as reported by Biebl et al. (47). Dunnett’s post hoc tests revealed a significant decrease in the number of BrdU+ cells after 100 cGy (100 cGy: 6 ± 2) compared to controls (0 cGy: 15 ± 3), with no significant effect of Fe-ion radiation at any lower dose. Figure 2F similarly quantifies BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus of male mice at one month after whole-body gamma irradiation. A Welch’s ANOVA comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of radiation on the number of BrdU+ cells remaining [F(6, 24) = 97.49, P < 0.0001] with a Games-Howell post hoc test revealing a significant decrease in the number of BrdU+ cells remaining at doses of 100 cGy and greater (100 cGy: 10 ± 2; 300 cGy: 2 ± 1) compared to controls (0 cGy: 16 ± 3). Again, the low-dose groups did not show a significant effect from whole-body gamma-ray exposure.

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2

Persistence of BrdU+ cells one month after whole-body irradiation at a range of doses (0–300 cGy). Panels A–D: Representative images of BrdU+ cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus of irradiated mice one month after sham or 100 cGy Fe-ion or gamma irradiation. Scale bar = 100 µm. Panels E and F: Graphs of BrdU+ cells one month after Fe-ion or gamma irradiation. Responses are presented as the percentage of the average number of BrdU+ cells detected in the corresponding sham-irradiated mice at 48 h. Error bars represent SEM. N = 7–10 mice per dose. Data were analyzed with Welch’s ANOVA followed by Games-Howell post hoc tests. *Significant effects are reported at a threshold of P < 0.05.

In our previously published study, we reported that exposure to proton radiation increased the proliferation of cells undergoing division at the time of exposure (48). The effect was first noted when we examined the ratio of the average number of BrdU+ cells at one month to the average number of BrdU+ cells at 48 h. In the context of the current experiments, we again examined this ratio after either gamma or Fe-ion irradiation over the range of doses tested, but did not detect an effect of either exposure; ANOVA analysis did not reveal a significant effect at P > 0.05 [gamma: F(6, 55) = 0.08476, P = 0.9975, Fe: F(5, 51)=0.2302, P = 0.9476)]. Consequently, we did not pursue staining with proliferative markers to more directly test whether or not gamma or Fe radiation alters the subsequent proliferation of cells undergoing division at the time of exposure.

Effects of Fe Ions vs. Gamma Rays on Neuronal Differentiation

New neurons arise from the proliferation and differentiation of progenitor cells that reside in the SGZ in the dentate gyrus (43). While a reduction in generated neurons in the adult brain is often reflective of a decrease in proliferating SGZ cells, the processes of proliferation, neurogenesis and survival can also be differentially regulated (49). To determine whether radiation exposure alters the number of newly differentiated neurons, we examined DCX staining in the dentate gyrus of whole-body Fe-ion- and gamma-irradiated mice. Figure 3A–D shows representative images of DCX staining in sham-irradiated and irradiated mice one month postirradiation. Figure 3E quantifies DCX immunoreactivity in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus of mice one month after whole-body Fe-ion irradiation and demonstrates that exposure reduced the number of newly differentiated neurons relative to the sham-irradiated controls (Fe ion). ANOVA analysis comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of whole-body Fe-ion irradiation on the percentage of DCX+ cells remaining [F(5, 54) = 8.909, P < 0.0001], with Dunnett’s post hoc tests revealing a significant decrease in the percentage of DCX+ cells remaining at doses of 100 cGy and greater (100 cGy: 63 ± 12) compared to controls (0 cGy: 100 ± 11); there was no significant effect of whole-body Fe-ion irradiation on the percentage of DCX+ cells at any lower dose level. Similarly, Fig. 3F quantifies DCX immunoreactivity in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus of mice one month after whole-body gamma irradiation and also demonstrates that exposure reduces the number of newly differentiated neurons relative to sham-irradiated controls (gamma). ANOVA analysis comparing all doses tested revealed a significant effect of whole-body gamma irradiation on the percentage of DCX+ cells remaining [F(6, 62) = 7.452, P < 0.0001]. Dunnett’s post hoc tests revealed a significant decrease in the percentage of DCX+ cells at doses of 100 cGy and greater (100 cGy: 81 ± 12, 300 cGy: 67 ± 12) compared to controls (0 cGy: 100 ± 5), with no significant effect at lower dose levels.

FIG. 3.

FIG. 3

DCX+ cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus after whole-body irradiation. Panels A–D: Representative images show DCX+ cells in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus in sham and 100 cGy irradiated mice one month after Fe-ion or gamma irradiation. Scale bar = 100 µm. Panels E and F: Graphs of DCX+ cells one month after either Fe ion or gamma irradiation. The responses are presented as the percentage of the average number of DCX+ cells/100,000 µm2 detected in the corresponding sham. Error bars represent SEM. N = 9–10 mice per dose. Data were analyzed with ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc tests. Significant effects were reported at a threshold of *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.0001.

DISCUSSION

Many published studies have shown an effect of ionizing radiation on the survival of adult-born neurons in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus (30, 36, 39, 41, 44, 5057). However, remarkably few have examined the dose-response relationship for whole-body irradiation with respect to this proliferating cell population over a low-dose range. We therefore chose to focus our investigation on whole-body HZE (Fe) ions and 137Cs gamma-ray exposures, since they represent relevant forms of ionizing radiation encountered in the space environment and after radiologic/nuclear disasters, respectively.

Our analysis of DCX staining in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, which provides an indication of the numbers of neuronal precursor cells and immature neurons, showed a statistically significant reduction at one month after whole-body Fe-ion and gamma irradiation at doses ≥100 cGy, and was mirrored by findings from the BrdU+ analysis. These data, therefore, are consistent with previously published studies suggesting that brain irradiation induces a prolonged reduction in neurogenesis (38, 44, 50, 54, 55). It is important to note that a persistent downregulation of DCX immunoreactivity has been shown to correlate with effects on depression-like hippocampal-related behaviors (41). However, not all previous studies using Fe ions have shown evidence of a reduction in neurogenesis after HZE irradiation (41). Furthermore, Son et al. demonstrated a persistent effect on DCX immunoreactivity at higher doses (10 Gy) of cranial exposure to 137Cs gamma rays, but not at the 100 cGy dose level (51). These differential findings may be partially explained by the differences in exposure volume (cranium vs. whole body). Furthermore, the natural age-dependent reductions in these cell populations may have further confounded the investigators’ ability to detect DCX immunoreactivity at later time points, especially beyond one month postirradiation (58, 59). Indeed, we also detected a large attrition in adult-born cells between the 48 h and one month postirradiation time point, as evidenced by the percentage of BrdU+ cells remaining at one month compared to 48 h in both cohorts of sham-irradiated mice (0 Gy; Fig. 2E and F). However, there was not an increase in the relative variability (coefficient of variation) of our measurement after 30 cGy Fe-ion irradiation (compared to lower Fe-ion doses), or to gamma irradiation at the same dose, suggesting that the failure to detect a significant effect at one month was not due to a decrease in the total number of BrdU+ cells detected.

The shared dose threshold for the observed effect after 100 cGy irradiation using both radiation types at one month was unanticipated, since gamma rays and Fe ions induce biologically distinct damages. The track structure of Fe ions provides a narrow (nanometer) core of energy deposition (ionizing events), with a penumbra of diffuse secondary ionizations (60), resulting in heterogeneous and complex damage (6163) distributed nonuniformly within a tissue volume. In contrast, the more sparsely ionizing 137Cs (and X-ray) exposures result in fewer ionization events, but with a more homogeneous damage distribution (64).

Support for such a differential dose distribution was borne out by our analysis of the acute (48 h) effect of radiation on the incorporation of BrdU by proliferating cells in the SGZ of the dentate gyrus, which demonstrated a clear distinction between the two radiation types. After gamma irradiation, the lowest dose seen with a statistically significant effect (reduction) on BrdU incorporation was 100 cGy at 48 h postirradiation, with little to no changes relative to controls at any of the low-dose levels. This compared to a threshold of 30 cGy after Fe-ion irradiation, with a nonsignificant trend being observed at all low-dose levels (1–10 cGy). This threshold in effect was lower than had been previously reported (39, 41, 55), although many of these studies had not examined exposures specifically in this relatively low-dose range (10–100 cGy). Nonetheless, the extent of the decrease we saw in the fraction of cycling cells (BrdU+) after 100 cGy Fe-ion irradiation is in general agreement with that reported by Encinas et al. (39), DeCarolis et al. (41) and Rivera et al. (55), despite methodological differences between these studies and ours with respect to BrdU dosing protocol, time points of assessment and genetic background of mice. Furthermore, our ability to demonstrate a differential between the effects of Fe ions and gamma rays on proliferation at doses as low as 30 cGy may be the result of the specific BrdU dosing protocol used, since multiple injections over the first 8 h may have provided us with a more sensitive detection rate.

The difference in the threshold for detecting an effect of Fe-ion radiation at the acute and more chronic time point begs the question: If the effect demonstrated at 48 h after e.g., 30 cGy irradiation (though the argument could be made at any dose) does not persist at one month, is it relevant? The short answer to this question is unclear, though it has been suggested that dividing cells in the dentate are functionally important independent of their role in producing progeny, and that altering their proliferation may affect behavior both acutely and more chronically (51, 6570). Further exploration of the influence of proliferating progenitors on the hippocampal circuit may give better insight into this question.

A full understanding of the biological effect of low-dose radiation is hampered by the time and money required to evaluate the dose response and time course of each different radiation type. This highlights the importance of understanding the dose-response profile either prior to designing experiments or when evaluating experiments to determine radiation risks. Interestingly, it has been suggested that LET-dependent trends for changes in neurogenesis would be difficult to demonstrate due to the complexity of the CNS radiation response (6). To inform the evaluation of CNS risk associated with exposure to space radiation, we examined responses in the C57BL/6 mouse after a single Fe-ion whole-body dose. There are obvious experimental limitations when attempting to replicate space radiation on Earth, therefore, there are some caveats in applying our data to considerations of risk for space travel. First, we examined the effect of exposure to only a single type of ion, Fe. Thus, our data are not reflective of physical or biological interactions that may be present with exposure to mixed particle radiation (71). Second, Fe ions encountered in space present with a wide range of energies that intermittently and unpredictably bombard astronauts during interplanetary space flights (72). We examined the effect of exposure to 1 GeV Fe ions, which are near the upper range of the spectrum of energies encountered, whereas the more plentiful low-energy Fe-ion particles deposit relatively more of their energy in tissue, thus their impact may not be inferable from our studies (73). Third, the fluence rates of the combination of ions and particles that make up galactic cosmic rays correspond to a tissue dose of approximately 0.3–0.6 mGy/day (74). Therefore, extrapolating findings observed after the relatively high-dose rates used at BNL to the potential outcomes that may result from exposure in space must be treated with caution, especially since the biology of radiation-induced damage and the subsequent DNA repair alters profoundly with changes in dose rate.

Low-dose 137Cs exposure represents a relevant form of radiation encountered in medical therapeutic devices, but also may be a constituent of exposures after nuclear power plant accidents or terrorist attacks. To inform the evaluation of risk associated with radioactive 137Cs, we examined responses in the C57BL/6 mouse after a single whole-body exposure to a static source of 137Cs. As suggested, there are caveats in applying the findings of our data to considerations of risk for human exposed to Fe ions. For example, radiation exposure can occur from either external or internal sources, the latter through inhalation or ingestion (75). We used an external source, thus our model will not represent the physiological effects that can occur from internal contamination. Ongoing experiments in our laboratory are underway to examine the effects of internal contamination in isolation and in conjunction with external contamination on neurogenic end points. Secondly, as part of a nuclear incident, individuals would likely receive a highly nonuniform dose, and there could be other confounding variables, such as concomitant exposure to burn, trauma or infection (75). Previous experiments in our laboratory have explored the possible synergism between thermal injury and radiation and demonstrated that thermal injury lowers the threshold for radiation-induced neuroinflammation (76).

There are also some caveats that are relevant to both types of radiation tested. Both environmental enrichment and forced running have been shown to increase adult neurogenesis after irradiation (7780). Thus, the standard laboratory housing conditions used in our studies may not recapitulate the effects of radiation experienced in a more complex or physically demanding environment. Additionally, radiation exposure in space is chronic, and has the potential to be chronic after a nuclear incident or terrorist act. Examining chronic exposures to low-dose radiation is rarely experimentally feasible since few facilities have either the capabilities or time available. Therefore, out of necessity, we examined responses to a single exposure. Whether a single exposure is more or less detrimental than chronic exposure to the same total dose is unclear, but the two types of exposures likely affect cycling and static processes differently, thus our model may not best represent cases of either varied or chronic exposure.

In summary, our data indicate that whole-body exposure to low-dose HZE (Fe) ions or gamma rays may provide a CNS-related health risk. Our analysis of the dose-response relationship to neurogenic end points indicates there are measurable radiation effects from doses as low as 30 and 100 cGy for Fe-ion and gamma-ray exposures, respectively. While this study does not represent a robust model of human exposure from medical therapeutic devices, nuclear power plant accidents, terrorist attacks or human exploratory space missions, this work does indicate that there are important dose-response relationships for 137Cs and Fe-ion exposure on neurogenic end points, which may inform future experimental design and aid in the determination of risk associated with low-dose systemic exposure. To inform decisions related to the risk of radiation exposure, it would be of great utility to determine in future experiments whether or not the complexity of the environment, including environmental enrichment and/or stressors, influences the threshold at which we can detect an effect of ionizing radiation.

Acknowledgments

Support for this work was provided by DOE-NASA Low Dose Radiation Biology Program (grant nos. DE-FG02-07ER64338) and NIH/NIAID 5U19 AI091036. We thank Lee Trojanczyk, Jack Walter and Mallory Olschowka for assistance with animal irradiations, behavioral assays and tissue preparation, as well as Drs. Peter Guida and Adam Rusek and their teams at Brookhaven National Laboratory for their support during the irradiation campaigns at the NSRL.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Schauer DA, Linton OW. NCRP Report No. 160, ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States, medical exposure–are we doing less with more, and is there a role for health physicists? Health Phys. 2009;97:1–5. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000356672.44380.b7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.National Research Council (US) Board on Radiation Effects Research. BEIR VII, Phase I, Letter Report. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1998. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2013. Health risk assessment from the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami, based on preliminary dose estimation. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Zeitlin C, Hassler DM, Cucinotta FA, Ehresmann B, Wimmer-Schweingruber RF, Brinza DE, et al. Measurements of energetic particle radiation in transit to Mars on the Mars Science Laboratory. Science. 2013;340:1080–1084. doi: 10.1126/science.1235989. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cucinotta FA. Review of NASA approach to space radiation risk assessments for Mars exploration. Health Phys. 2015;108:131–142. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cucinotta FA, Alp M, Sulzman FM, Wang M. Space radiation risks to the central nervous system. Life Sci Space Res (Amst) 2014;2:54–69. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kempermann G, Song H, Gage FH. Neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2015;7:a018812. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a018812. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Eriksson PS, Perfilieva E, Bjork-Eriksson T, Alborn AM, Nordborg C, Peterson DA, et al. Neurogenesis in the adult human hippocampus. Nat Med. 1998;4:1313–1317. doi: 10.1038/3305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Oomen CA, Bekinschtein P, Kent BA, Saksida LM, Bussey TJ. Adult hippocampal neurogenesis and its role in cognition. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2014;5:573–587. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1304. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Cameron HA, Glover LR. Adult neurogenesis: beyond learning and memory. Annu Rev Psychol. 2015;66:53–81. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Shukitt-Hale B, Casadesus G, Cantuti-Castelvetri I, Rabin BM, Joseph JA. Cognitive deficits induced by 56Fe radiation exposure. Adv Space Res. 2003;31:119–126. doi: 10.1016/s0273-1177(02)00878-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Shukitt-Hale B, Casadesus G, McEwen JJ, Rabin BM, Joseph JA. Spatial learning and memory deficits induced by exposure to iron-56-particle radiation. Radiat Res. 2000;154:28–33. doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2000)154[0028:slamdi]2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Seo DO, Carillo MA, Chih-Hsiung Lim S, Tanaka KF, Drew MR. Adult hippocampal neurogenesis modulates fear learning through associative and nonassociative mechanisms. J Neurosci. 2015;35:11330–11345. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0483-15.2015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Shors TJ, Miesegaes G, Beylin A, Zhao M, Rydel T, Gould E. Neurogenesis in the adult is involved in the formation of trace memories. Nature. 2001;410:372–376. doi: 10.1038/35066584. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Shors TJ, Townsend DA, Zhao M, Kozorovitskiy Y, Gould E. Neurogenesis may relate to some but not all types of hippocampal-dependent learning. Hippocampus. 2002;12:578–584. doi: 10.1002/hipo.10103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Clelland CD, Choi M, Romberg C, Clemenson GD, Jr, Fragniere A, Tyers P, et al. A functional role for adult hippocampal neurogenesis in spatial pattern separation. Science. 2009;325:210–213. doi: 10.1126/science.1173215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Deng W, Saxe MD, Gallina IS, Gage FH. Adult-born hippocampal dentate granule cells undergoing maturation modulate learning and memory in the brain. J Neurosci. 2009;29:13532–13542. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3362-09.2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Drew MR, Denny CA, Hen R. Arrest of adult hippocampal neurogenesis in mice impairs single- but not multiple-trial contextual fear conditioning. Behav Neurosci. 2010;124:446–454. doi: 10.1037/a0020081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Sahay A, Scobie KN, Hill AS, O’Carroll CM, Kheirbek MA, Burghardt NS, et al. Increasing adult hippocampal neurogenesis is sufficient to improve pattern separation. Nature. 2011;472:466–470. doi: 10.1038/nature09817. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Tronel S, Belnoue L, Grosjean N, Revest JM, Piazza PV, Koehl M, et al. Adult-born neurons are necessary for extended contextual discrimination. Hippocampus. 2012;22:292–298. doi: 10.1002/hipo.20895. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Swan AA, Clutton JE, Chary PK, Cook SG, Liu GG, Drew MR. Characterization of the role of adult neurogenesis in touch-screen discrimination learning. Hippocampus. 2014;24:1581–1591. doi: 10.1002/hipo.22337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Niibori Y, Yu TS, Epp JR, Akers KG, Josselyn SA, Frankland PW. Suppression of adult neurogenesis impairs population coding of similar contexts in hippocampal CA3 region. Nat Commun. 2012;3:1253. doi: 10.1038/ncomms2261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Santarelli L, Saxe M, Gross C, Surget A, Battaglia F, Dulawa S, et al. Requirement of hippocampal neurogenesis for the behavioral effects of antidepressants. Science. 2003;301:805–809. doi: 10.1126/science.1083328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Airan RD, Meltzer LA, Roy M, Gong Y, Chen H, Deisseroth K. High-speed imaging reveals neurophysiological links to behavior in an animal model of depression. Science. 2007;317:819–823. doi: 10.1126/science.1144400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Schloesser RJ, Lehmann M, Martinowich K, Manji HK, Herkenham M. Environmental enrichment requires adult neurogenesis to facilitate the recovery from psychosocial stress. Mol Psychiatry. 2010;15:1152–1153. doi: 10.1038/mp.2010.34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Snyder JS, Soumier A, Brewer M, Pickel J, Cameron HA. Adult hippocampal neurogenesis buffers stress responses and depressive behaviour. Nature. 2011;476:458–461. doi: 10.1038/nature10287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Tsai CY, Tsai CY, Arnold SJ, Huang GJ. Ablation of hippocampal neurogenesis in mice impairs the response to stress during the dark cycle. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8373. doi: 10.1038/ncomms9373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lagace DC, Donovan MH, DeCarolis NA, Farnbauch LA, Malhotra S, Berton O, et al. Adult hippocampal neurogenesis is functionally important for stress-induced social avoidance. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:4436–4441. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0910072107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Greene-Schloesser D, Robbins ME, Peiffer AM, Shaw EG, Wheeler KT, Chan MD. Radiation-induced brain injury: A review. Front Oncol. 2012;2:73. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2012.00073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Manda K, Ueno M, Anzai K. Space radiation-induced inhibition of neurogenesis in the hippocampal dentate gyrus and memory impairment in mice: ameliorative potential of the melatonin metabolite, AFMK. J Pineal Res. 2008;45:430–438. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-079X.2008.00611.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tome WA, Gokhan S, Brodin NP, Gulinello ME, Heard J, Mehler MF, et al. A mouse model replicating hippocampal sparing cranial irradiation in humans: A tool for identifying new strategies to limit neurocognitive decline. Sci Rep. 2015;5:14384. doi: 10.1038/srep14384. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Fuemmeler BF, Elkin TD, Mullins LL. Survivors of childhood brain tumors: behavioral, emotional, and social adjustment. Clin Psychol Rev. 2002;22:547–585. doi: 10.1016/s0272-7358(01)00120-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Zebrack BJ, Gurney JG, Oeffinger K, Whitton J, Packer RJ, Mertens A, et al. Psychological outcomes in long-term survivors of childhood brain cancer: a report from the childhood cancer survivor study. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:999–1006. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.06.148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Bruce M. A systematic and conceptual review of posttraumatic stress in childhood cancer survivors and their parents. Clin Psychol Rev. 2006;26:233–256. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2005.10.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Cordes MC, Scherwath A, Ahmad T, Cole AM, Ernst G, Oppitz K, et al. Distress, anxiety and depression in patients with brain metastases before and after radiotherapy. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:731. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-731. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Monje ML, Mizumatsu S, Fike JR, Palmer TD. Irradiation induces neural precursor-cell dysfunction. Nat Med. 2002;8:955–962. doi: 10.1038/nm749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rola R, Fishman K, Baure J, Rosi S, Lamborn KR, Obenaus A, et al. Hippocampal neurogenesis and neuroinflammation after cranial irradiation with (56)Fe particles. Radiat Res. 2008;169:626–632. doi: 10.1667/RR1263.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Rola R, Sarkissian V, Obenaus A, Nelson GA, Otsuka S, Limoli CL, et al. High-LET radiation induces inflammation and persistent changes in markers of hippocampal neurogenesis. Radiat Res. 2005;164:556–560. doi: 10.1667/rr3412.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Encinas JM, Vazquez ME, Switzer RC, Chamberland DW, Nick H, Levine HG, et al. Quiescent adult neural stem cells are exceptionally sensitive to cosmic radiation. Exp Neurol. 2008;210:274–279. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2007.10.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Rosi S, Belarbi K, Ferguson RA, Fishman K, Obenaus A, Raber J, et al. Trauma-induced alterations in cognition and Arc expression are reduced by previous exposure to 56Fe irradiation. Hippocampus. 2012;22:544–554. doi: 10.1002/hipo.20920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.DeCarolis NA, Rivera PD, Ahn F, Amaral WZ, LeBlanc JA, Malhotra S, et al. Fe particle exposure results in a long-lasting increase in a cellular index of genomic instability and transiently suppresses adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Life Sci Space Res (Amst) 2014;2:70–79. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2014.06.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Cherry JD, Liu B, Frost JL, Lemere CA, Williams JP, Olschowka JA, et al. Galactic cosmic radiation leads to cognitive impairment and increased abeta plaque accumulation in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS One. 2012;7:e53275. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053275. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Altman J, Das GD. Post-natal origin of microneurones in the rat brain. Nature. 1965;207:953–956. doi: 10.1038/207953a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Tada E, Parent JM, Lowenstein DH, Fike JR. X-irradiation causes a prolonged reduction in cell proliferation in the dentate gyrus of adult rats. Neuroscience. 2000;99:33–41. doi: 10.1016/s0306-4522(00)00151-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Nagai R, Tsunoda S, Hori Y, Asada H. Selective vulnerability to radiation in the hippocampal dentate granule cells. Surg Neurol. 2000;53:503–506. doi: 10.1016/s0090-3019(00)00214-7. discussion 6–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Piatti VC, Ewell LA, Leutgeb JK. Neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus: carrying the message or dictating the tone. Front Neurosci. 2013;7:50. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Biebl M, Cooper CM, Winkler J, Kuhn HG. Analysis of neurogenesis and programmed cell death reveals a self-renewing capacity in the adult rat brain. Neurosci Lett. 2000;291:17–20. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3940(00)01368-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Sweet TB, Panda N, Hein AM, Das SL, Hurley SD, Olschowka JA, et al. Central nervous system effects of whole-body proton irradiation. Radiat Res. 2014;182:18–34. doi: 10.1667/RR13699.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Thomas RM, Hotsenpiller G, Peterson DA. Acute psychosocial stress reduces cell survival in adult hippocampal neurogenesis without altering proliferation. J Neurosci. 2007;27:2734–2743. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3849-06.2007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Mizumatsu S, Monje ML, Morhardt DR, Rola R, Palmer TD, Fike JR. Extreme sensitivity of adult neurogenesis to low doses of X-irradiation. Cancer Res. 2003;63:4021–4027. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Son Y, Yang M, Kim JS, Kim J, Kim SH, Kim JC, et al. Hippocampal dysfunction during the chronic phase following a single exposure to cranial irradiation. Exp Neurol. 2014;254:134–144. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2014.01.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Oh SB, Park HR, Jang YJ, Choi SY, Son TG, Lee J. Baicalein attenuates impaired hippocampal neurogenesis and the neurocognitive deficits induced by gamma-ray radiation. Br J Pharmacol. 2013;168:421–431. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2012.02142.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Park MK, Kim S, Jung U, Kim I, Kim JK, Roh C. Effect of acute and fractionated irradiation on hippocampal neurogenesis. Molecules. 2012;17:9462–9468. doi: 10.3390/molecules17089462. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Rola R, Otsuka S, Obenaus A, Nelson GA, Limoli CL, VandenBerg SR, et al. Indicators of hippocampal neurogenesis are altered by 56Fe-particle irradiation in a dose-dependent manner. Radiat Res. 2004;162:442–446. doi: 10.1667/rr3234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Rivera PD, Shih HY, Leblanc JA, Cole MG, Amaral WZ, Mukherjee S, et al. Acute and fractionated exposure to high-LET (56)Fe HZE-particle radiation both result in similar long-term deficits in adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Radiat Res. 2013;180:658–667. doi: 10.1667/RR13480.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Kang JO, Hong SE, Kim SK, Kim CJ, Lee TH, Chang HK, et al. Adaptive responses induced by low dose radiation in dentate gyrus of rats. J Korean Med Sci. 2006;21:1103–1107. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.6.1103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Otsuka S, Coderre JA, Micca PL, Morris GM, Hopewell JW, Rola R, et al. Depletion of neural precursor cells after local brain irradiation is due to radiation dose to the parenchyma, not the vasculature. Radiat Res. 2006;165:582–591. doi: 10.1667/RR3539.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Dayer AG, Ford AA, Cleaver KM, Yassaee M, Cameron HA. Short-term and long-term survival of new neurons in the rat dentate gyrus. J Comp Neurol. 2003;460:563–572. doi: 10.1002/cne.10675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Sierra A, Encinas JM, Deudero JJ, Chancey JH, Enikolopov G, Overstreet-Wadiche LS, et al. Microglia shape adult hippocampal neurogenesis through apoptosis-coupled phagocytosis. Cell Stem Cell. 2010;7:483–495. doi: 10.1016/j.stem.2010.08.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Cucinotta FA, Nikjoo H, Goodhead DT. Model for radial dependence of frequency distributions for energy imparted in nanometer volumes from HZE particles. Radiat Res. 2000;153:459–468. doi: 10.1667/0033-7587(2000)153[0459:mfrdof]2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Nakajima NI, Brunton H, Watanabe R, Shrikhande A, Hirayama R, Matsufuji N, et al. Visualisation of gammaH2AX foci caused by heavy ion particle traversal; distinction between core track versus non-track damage. PLoS One. 2013;8:e70107. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Goodhead DT, Nikjoo H. Track structure analysis of ultrasoft X-rays compared to high- and low-LET radiations. Int J Radiat Biol. 1989;55:513–529. doi: 10.1080/09553008914550571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Loucas BD, Durante M, Bailey SM, Cornforth MN. Chromosome damage in human cells by gamma rays, alpha particles and heavy ions: track interactions in basic dose-response relationships. Radiat Res. 2013;179:9–20. doi: 10.1667/RR3089.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Jeong MH, Yang KM, Jeong DH, Lee CG, Oh SJ, Jeong SK, et al. Protective activity of a novel resveratrol analogue, HS-1793, against DNA damage in 137Cs-irradiated CHO-K1 cells. J Radiat Res. 2014;55:464–475. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrt140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Amador-Arjona A, Elliott J, Miller A, Ginbey A, Pazour GJ, Enikolopov G, et al. Primary cilia regulate proliferation of amplifying progenitors in adult hippocampus: implications for learning and memory. J Neurosci. 2011;31:9933–9944. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1062-11.2011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Farioli-Vecchioli S, Saraulli D, Costanzi M, Pacioni S, Cina I, Aceti M, et al. The timing of differentiation of adult hippocampal neurons is crucial for spatial memory. PLoS Biol. 2008;6:e246. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Arruda-Carvalho M, Sakaguchi M, Akers KG, Josselyn SA, Frankland PW. Posttraining ablation of adult-generated neurons degrades previously acquired memories. J Neurosci. 2011;31:15113–15127. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3432-11.2011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.McAvoy K, Besnard A, Sahay A. Adult hippocampal neurogenesis and pattern separation in DG: a role for feedback inhibition in modulating sparseness to govern population-based coding. Front Syst Neurosci. 2015;9:120. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Finnegan R, Becker S. Neurogenesis paradoxically decreases both pattern separation and memory interference. Front Syst Neurosci. 2015;9:136. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2015.00136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Abe P, Molnar Z, Tzeng YS, Lai DM, Arnold SJ, Stumm R. Intermediate progenitors facilitate intracortical progression of thalamocortical axons and interneurons through CXCL12 chemokine signaling. J Neurosci. 2015;35:13053–13063. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1488-15.2015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Norbury JW, Schimmerling W, Slaba TC, Azzam EI, Badavi FF, Baiocco G, et al. Galactic cosmic ray simulation at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory. Life Sci Space Res (Amst) 2016;8:38–51. doi: 10.1016/j.lssr.2016.02.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.HZE-particle effects in manned spaceflight. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 1973. NAS-NAE Report, May 3, 1973. Radiobiological Advisory Panel of the Space Science Board, National Academy of Sciences. [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Sridharan DM, Chappell LJ, Whalen MK, Cucinotta FA, Pluth JM. Defining the biological effectiveness of components of high-LET track structure. Radiat Res. 2015;184:105–119. doi: 10.1667/RR13684.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Human exploration research opportunities. Washington, DC: NASA Space Radiation Program Element; 2015. Appendix D. NNJ14ZSA001N-Radiation. Ground based studies in space radiobiology. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) No. 43.003. ( http://bit.ly/2fWZZhB) [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Williams JP, Brown SL, Georges GE, Hauer-Jensen M, Hill RP, Huser AK, et al. Animal models for medical countermeasures to radiation exposure. Radiat Res. 2010;173:557–578. doi: 10.1667/RR1880.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Cherry JD, Williams JP, O’Banion MK, Olschowka JA. Thermal injury lowers the threshold for radiation-induced neuroinflammation and cognitive dysfunction. Radiat Res. 2013;180:398–406. doi: 10.1667/RR3363.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Wojtowicz JM, Askew ML, Winocur G. The effects of running and of inhibiting adult neurogenesis on learning and memory in rats. Eur J Neurosci. 2008;27:1494–1502. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06128.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Naylor AS, Bull C, Nilsson MK, Zhu C, Bjork-Eriksson T, Eriksson PS, et al. Voluntary running rescues adult hippocampal neurogenesis after irradiation of the young mouse brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105:14632–14637. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0711128105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Fan Y, Liu Z, Weinstein PR, Fike JR, Liu J. Environmental enrichment enhances neurogenesis and improves functional outcome after cranial irradiation. Eur J Neurosci. 2007;25:38–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05269.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Garthe A, Roeder I, Kempermann G. Mice in an enriched environment learn more flexibly because of adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Hippocampus. 2016;26:261–271. doi: 10.1002/hipo.22520. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES