The BDNF Val66Met Polymorphism Interacts with Maternal Parenting Influencing Adolescent Depressive Symptoms: Evidence of Differential Susceptibility Model

Abstract

Although depressive symptoms are common during adolescence, little research has examined gene-environment interaction on youth depression. This study chose the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene, tested the interaction between a functional polymorphism resulting amino acid substitution of valine (Val) to methionine (Met) in the proBDNF protein at codon 66 (Val66Met), and maternal parenting on youth depressive symptoms in a sample of 780 community adolescents of Chinese Han ethnicity (aged 11-17, M = 13.6, 51.3 % females). Participants reported their depressive symptoms and perceived maternal parenting. Results indicated the BDNF Val66Met polymorphism significantly moderated the influence of maternal warmth-reasoning, but not harshness-hostility, on youth depressive symptoms. Confirmatory model evaluation indicated that the interaction effect involving warmth-reasoning conformed to the differential-susceptibility rather than diathesis-stress model of person-X-environment interaction. Thus, Val carriers experienced less depressive symptoms than Met homozygotes when mothering was more positive but more symptoms when mothering was less positive. The findings provided evidence in support of the differential susceptibility hypothesis of youth depressive symptoms and shed light on the importance of examining the gene-environment interaction from a developmental perspective.

Cumulative psychosocial risk, parental socialization, and child cognitive functioning: A longitudinal cascade model.

“…These reports align with social policies initiatives advocating for integrated and coordinated systems of care that are aimed not only at alleviating child physical and mental health problems, but also systemic issues related to family hardship that may precipitate involvement in the child welfare system (Jaffee & Christian, 2014). These efforts should attempt not only to target the high-stress and low-resource circumstances that generate and sustain inequalities, but also to leverage resiliency resources that may protect against the social and biological factors that propel these cascades of adversity (Beaver & Belsky, 2012; Schwerdtfeger Gallus, Shreffler, Merten, & Cox, 2015; Wade, Hoffmann, & Jenkins, 2015; Zhang et al, 2016). As our understanding of the toxic effects of psychosocial stress on parent and child competencies improves, we will be better positioned to advance psychometrically sound screening tools for universal assessment of risk, and to implement evidence-based psychotherapies that reflect a deep awareness of the social, behavioral, and neurobiological consequences of adversity on adaptation across generations.…”

Substances Pathological of Use and Syndrome Z: Medicine D

“…Attention to care for medications and situations that activate the neuronal pathways shared in common serve to prevent the reactivation of the relapse process. Traumas, monetary gains, gambling, candy abuse, pornography and other medications that bring false sense of pleasure (psychological addiction) produce escape from reality like Cannabis and psychedelics [200][201][202][203][204][205][206][207][208][209][210][211][212][213][214][215][216][217][218][219].…”

“…These are moments that require more attention to the demands of survival pressures at work, meetings with family members, changes in environments and commemorative dates, such as the end of years and birthday, because they activate unconscious schemes for health professionals and friends, with activation of the relapse process [200][201][202][203][204][205][206][207][208][209][210][211][212][213][214][215][216][217][218][219].…”

Sensory processing sensitivity behavior moderates the association between environmental harshness, unpredictability, and child socioemotional functioning

“…In the past 30 years, this phenomenon of different individual responsivity to the environment has become the focus of several theories, including the differential susceptibility theory (Belsky, 1997;, the biological sensitivity to the context theory (Boyce & Ellis, 2005), and the sensory processing sensitivity framework (SPS, Aron & Aron, 1997). Toward this, a variety of potential markers for individual susceptibility have been identified, including temperament (e.g., negative emotionality, , genes (e.g., Zhang et al, 2016), and physiological reactivity (e.g., Li et al, 2019).…”