Social Isolation: How Can the Effects on the Cholinergic System Be Isolated?

Lessons from lonely flies: Molecular and neuronal mechanisms underlying social isolation

Animals respond to changes in the environment which affect their internal state by adapting their behaviors. Social isolation is a form of passive environmental stressor that alters behaviors across animal kingdom, including humans, rodents, and fruit flies. Social isolation is known to increase violence, disrupt sleep and increase depression leading to poor mental and physical health. Recent evidences from several model organisms suggest that social isolation leads to remodeling of the transcriptional and epigenetic landscape which alters behavioral outcomes. In this review, we explore how manipulating social experience of fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster can shed light on molecular and neuronal mechanisms underlying isolation driven behaviors. We discuss the recent advances made using the powerful genetic toolkit and behavioral assays in Drosophila to uncover role of neuromodulators, sensory modalities, pheromones, neuronal circuits and molecular mechanisms in mediating social isolation. The insights gained from these studies could be crucial for developing effective therapeutic interventions in future.

Multitargeting nature of muscarinic orthosteric agonists and antagonists

Muscarinic receptors (mAChRs) are typical members of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) family and exist in five subtypes from M₁ to M₅. Muscarinic receptor subtypes do not sufficiently differ in affinity to orthosteric antagonists or agonists; therefore, the analysis of receptor subtypes is complicated, and misinterpretations can occur. Usually, when researchers mainly specialized in CNS and peripheral functions aim to study mAChR involvement in behavior, learning, spinal locomotor networks, biological rhythms, cardiovascular physiology, bronchoconstriction, gastrointestinal tract functions, schizophrenia, and Parkinson’s disease, they use orthosteric ligands and they do not use allosteric ligands. Moreover, they usually rely on manufacturers’ claims that could be misleading. This review aimed to call the attention of researchers not deeply focused on mAChR pharmacology to this fact. Importantly, limited selective binding is not only a property of mAChRs but is a general attribute of most neurotransmitter receptors. In this review, we want to give an overview of the most common off-targets for established mAChR ligands. In this context, an important point is a mention the tremendous knowledge gap on off-targets for novel compounds compared to very well-established ligands. Therefore, we will summarize reported affinities and give an outline of strategies to investigate the subtype’s function, thereby avoiding ambiguous results. Despite that, the multitargeting nature of drugs acting also on mAChR could be an advantage when treating such diseases as schizophrenia. Antipsychotics are a perfect example of a multitargeting advantage in treatment. A promising strategy is the use of allosteric ligands, although some of these ligands have also been shown to exhibit limited selectivity. Another new direction in the development of muscarinic selective ligands is functionally selective and biased agonists. The possible selective ligands, usually allosteric, will also be listed. To overcome the limited selectivity of orthosteric ligands, the recommended process is to carefully examine the presence of respective subtypes in specific tissues via knockout studies, carefully apply “specific” agonists/antagonists at appropriate concentrations and then calculate the probability of a specific subtype involvement in specific functions. This could help interested researchers aiming to study the central nervous system functions mediated by the muscarinic receptor.