SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Africanized Bee Venom (<i>Apis mellifera</i> Linnaeus): Neuroprotective Effects in a Parkinson's Disease Mouse Model Induced by 6-hydroxydopamine.

Toxics · 2022-10-03

DOI: 10.3390/toxics10100583PMID: 36287863

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

This study evaluated the neuroprotective effects of the Africanized bee venom (BV) and its mechanisms of action after 6-hydroxydopamine-(6-OHDA)-induced lesion in a mice model. Prior to BV treatment, mice received intrastriatal microinjections of 6-OHDA (no induced dopaminergic neuronal death) or ascorbate saline (as a control). BV was administered subcutaneously at different dosages (0.01, 0.05 or 0.1 mg·Kg-1) once every two days over a period of 3 weeks. The open field test was carried out, together with the immunohistochemical and histopathological analysis. The chemical composition of BV was also assessed, identifying the highest concentrations of apamin, phospholipase A2 and melittin. In the behavioral evaluation, the BV (0.1 mg·Kg-1) counteracted the 6-OHDA-induced decrease in crossings and rearing. 6-OHDA caused loss of dopaminergic cell bodies in the substantia nigra pars compacta and fibers in striatum (STR). Mice that received 0.01 mg·Kg-1 showed significant increase in the mean survival of dopaminergic cell bodies. Increased astrocytic infiltration occurred in the STR of 6-OHDA injected mice, differently from those of the groups treated with BV. The results suggested that Africanized BV has neuroprotective activity in an animal model of Parkinson's disease.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.