Zebrafish as a model of Parkinson's disease

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease among the elderly. Its etiology is unknown and no disease-modifying drugs are available. Thus, more information concerning its pathogenesis is needed. Among other genes, mutated PTEN-induced kinase 1 (PINK1) has been linked to early-onset and sporadic PD, but its mode of action is poorly understood. Most animal models of PD are based on the use of the neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP). MPTP is metabolized to MPP+ by monoamine oxidase B (MAO B) and causes cell death of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra in mammals. Zebrafish has been a widely used model organism in developmental biology, but is now emerging as a model for human diseases due to its ideal combination of properties. Zebrafish are inexpensive and easy to maintain, develop rapidly, breed in large quantities producing transparent embryos, and are readily manipulated by various methods, particularly genetic ones. In addition, zebrafish are vertebrate animals and results derived from zebrafish may be more applicable to mammals than results from invertebrate genetic models such as Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans. However, the similarity cannot be taken for granted. The aim of this study was to establish and test a PD model using larval zebrafish. The developing monoaminergic neuronal systems of larval zebrafish were investigated. We identified and classified 17 catecholaminergic and 9 serotonergic neuron populations in the zebrafish brain. A 3-dimensional atlas was created to facilitate future research. Only one gene encoding MAO was found in the zebrafish genome. Zebrafish MAO showed MAO A-type substrate specificity, but non-A-non-B inhibitor specificity. Distribution of MAO in larval and adult zebrafish brains was both diffuse and distinctly cellular. Inhibition of MAO during larval development led to markedly elevated 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin, 5-HT) levels, which decreased the locomotion of the fish. MPTP exposure caused a transient loss of cells in specific aminergic cell populations and decreased locomotion. MPTP-induced changes could be rescued by the MAO B inhibitor deprenyl, suggesting a role for MAO in MPTP toxicity. MPP+ affected only one catecholaminergic cell population; thus, the action of MPP+ was more selective than that of MPTP. The zebrafish PINK1 gene was cloned in zebrafish, and morpholino oligonucleotides were used to suppress its expression in larval zebrafish. The functional domains and expression pattern of zebrafish PINK1 resembled those of other vertebrates, suggesting that zebrafish is a feasible model for studying PINK1. Translation inhibition resulted in cell loss of the same catecholaminergic cell populations as MPTP and MPP+. Inactivation of PINK1 sensitized larval zebrafish to subefficacious doses of MPTP, causing a decrease in locomotion and cell loss in one dopaminergic cell population. Zebrafish appears to be a feasible model for studying PD, since its aminergic systems, mode of action of MPTP, and functions of PINK1 resemble those of mammalians. However, the functions of zebrafish MAO differ from the two forms of MAO found in mammals. Future studies using zebrafish PD models should utilize the advantages specific to zebrafish, such as the ability to execute large-scale genetic or drug screens.

Explorations in the distributional and semantic similarity of words

A straightforward computation of the list of the words (the `tail words' of the list) that are distributionally most similar to a given word (the `head word' of the list) leads to the question: How semantically similar to the head word are the tail words; that is: how similar are their meanings to its meaning? And can we do better? The experiment was done on nearly 18,000 most frequent nouns in a Finnish newsgroup corpus. These nouns are considered to be distributionally similar to the extent that they occur in the same direct dependency relations with the same nouns, adjectives and verbs. The extent of the similarity of their computational representations is quantified with the information radius. The semantic classification of head-tail pairs is intuitive; some tail words seem to be semantically similar to the head word, some do not. Each such pair is also associated with a number of further distributional variables. Individually, their overlap for the semantic classes is large, but the trained classification-tree models have some success in using combinations to predict the semantic class. The training data consists of a random sample of 400 head-tail pairs with the tail word ranked among the 20 distributionally most similar to the head word, excluding names. The models are then tested on a random sample of another 100 such pairs. The best success rates range from 70% to 92% of the test pairs, where a success means that the model predicted my intuitive semantic class of the pair. This seems somewhat promising when distributional similarity is used to capture semantically similar words. This analysis also includes a general discussion of several different similarity formulas, arranged in three groups: those that apply to sets with graded membership, those that apply to the members of a vector space, and those that apply to probability mass functions.

Methods in general model localization

The aim of this study was to evaluate and test methods which could improve local estimates of a general model fitted to a large area. In the first three studies, the intention was to divide the study area into sub-areas that were as homogeneous as possible according to the residuals of the general model, and in the fourth study, the localization was based on the local neighbourhood. According to spatial autocorrelation (SA), points closer together in space are more likely to be similar than those that are farther apart. Local indicators of SA (LISAs) test the similarity of data clusters. A LISA was calculated for every observation in the dataset, and together with the spatial position and residual of the global model, the data were segmented using two different methods: classification and regression trees (CART) and the multiresolution segmentation algorithm (MS) of the eCognition software. The general model was then re-fitted (localized) to the formed sub-areas. In kriging, the SA is modelled with a variogram, and the spatial correlation is a function of the distance (and direction) between the observation and the point of calculation. A general trend is corrected with the residual information of the neighbourhood, whose size is controlled by the number of the nearest neighbours. Nearness is measured as Euclidian distance. With all methods, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) were lower, but with the methods that segmented the study area, the deviance in single localized RMSEs was wide. Therefore, an element capable of controlling the division or localization should be included in the segmentation-localization process. Kriging, on the other hand, provided stable estimates when the number of neighbours was sufficient (over 30), thus offering the best potential for further studies. Even CART could be combined with kriging or non-parametric methods, such as most similar neighbours (MSN).