Evidence Hub

Atp1a2 and Kcnj9 are candidate genes underlying sensitivity to oxycodone-induced locomotor activation and withdrawal-induced anxiety-like behaviors in C57BL/6 substrains

Goldberg LR, Baskin BM, Adla Y, Beierle JA, Kelliher JC, Yao EJ, Kirkpatrick SL, Reed ER et al.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024

Abstract

Opioid use disorder is heritable, yet its genetic etiology is largely unknown. C57BL/6J and C57BL/6NJ mouse substrains exhibit phenotypic diversity in the context of limited genetic diversity which together can facilitate genetic discovery. Here, we found C57BL/6NJ mice were less sensitive to oxycodone (OXY)-induced locomotor activation versus C57BL/6J mice in a conditioned place preference paradigm. Narrow-sense heritability was estimated at 0.22-0.31, implicating suitability for genetic analysis. Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping in an F2 cross identified a chromosome 1 QTL explaining 7-12% of the variance in OXY locomotion and anxiety-like withdrawal in the elevated plus maze. A second QTL for EPM withdrawal behavior on chromosome 5 near Gabra2 (alpha-2 subunit of GABA-A receptor) explained 9% of the variance. To narrow the chromosome 1 locus, we generated recombinant lines spanning 163-181 Mb, captured the QTL for OXY locomotor traits and withdrawal, and fine-mapped a 2.45-Mb region (170.16-172.61 Mb). Transcriptome analysis identified five, localized striatal cis-eQTL transcripts and two were confirmed at the protein level (KCNJ9, ATP1A2). Kcnj9 codes for a potassium channel (GIRK3) that is a major effector of mu opioid receptor signaling. Atp1a2 codes for a subunit of a Na+/K+ ATPase enzyme that regulates neuronal excitability and shows functional adaptations following chronic opioid administration. To summarize, we identified two candidate genes underlying the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a preprint, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free