Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Sex differences in corticotropin-releasing factor receptor signaling and trafficking: potential role in female vulnerability to stress-related psychopathology


Although the higher incidence of stress-related psychiatric disorders in females is well documented, its basis is unknown. Here, we show that the receptor for corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), the neuropeptide that orchestrates the stress response, signals and is trafficked differently in female rats in a manner that could result in a greater response and decreased adaptation to stressors. Most cellular responses to CRF in the brain are mediated by CRF receptor (CRFr) association with the GTP-binding protein, Gs. Receptor immunoprecipitation studies revealed enhanced CRFr-Gs coupling in cortical tissue of unstressed female rats. Previous stressor exposure abolished this sex difference by increasing CRFr-Gs coupling selectively in males. These molecular results mirrored the effects of sex and stress on sensitivity of locus ceruleus (LC)-norepinephrine neurons to CRF. Differences in CRFr trafficking were also identified that could compromise stress adaptation in females. Specifically, stress-induced CRFr association with β-arrestin2, an integral step in receptor internalization, occurred only in male rats. Immunoelectron microscopy confirmed that stress elicited CRFr internalization in LC neurons of male rats exclusively, consistent with reported electrophysiological evidence for stress-induced desensitization to CRF in males. Together, these studies identified two aspects of CRFr function, increased cellular signaling and compromised internalization, which render CRF-receptive neurons of females more sensitive to low levels of CRF and less adaptable to high levels of CRF. CRFr dysfunction in females may underlie their increased vulnerability to develop stress-related pathology, particularly that related to increased activity of the LC-norepinephrine system, such as depression or post-traumatic stress disorder.


Stress-related psychiatric disorders (for example, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder) are twice as prevalent in women compared to men.1, 2, 3 Although the neurobiological basis for this is unknown, differences in stress reactivity have been implicated in this disparity.4, 5, 6, 7 Because corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), a primary mediator of the stress response, is dysregulated in stress-related psychiatric disorders, it is a likely substrate for sex differences in stress vulnerability.8, 9, 10, 11 Indeed, evidence for direct estrogenic regulation of CRF gene expression provides a compelling mechanism for sexual dimorphism of stress reactivity and prevalence of stress-related psychopathology in women.12, 13

CRF acts as a neurohormone to initiate the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal response to stress and as a neurotransmitter to initiate autonomic, behavioral and cognitive components of the stress response.14, 15, 16 One target of CRF neurotransmission is the locus ceruleus (LC), the source of the major brain norepinephrine system that regulates emotional arousal.17, 18, 19, 20 CRF activates LC neurons during stress and this is associated with heightened arousal.19, 21, 22 Although these effects are adaptive in response to an acute stressor, persistent or inappropriate LC-norepinephrine activation has pathological consequences. Indeed, excessive activity of CRF and LC-norepinephrine systems is thought to underlie the core feature of hyperarousal in melancholic depression.8, 10, 23 Similarly, CRF hypersecretion and increased LC sensitivity have been implicated in post-traumatic stress disorder.24, 25 Thus, sex differences in these systems or their interaction could contribute to female vulnerability to these stress-related illnesses.

Our previous electrophysiological studies demonstrated sex differences in LC sensitivity to CRF and its regulation by previous stress that could be expressed as excessive activation of the LC-norepinephrine system in females.26 LC neurons of unstressed female rats were more sensitive to CRF compared to males, as indicated by a leftward shift in the CRF dose–response curve. In addition, previous swim stress sensitized LC neurons of male rats only to low doses of CRF and desensitized them to high doses, such that the CRF dose–response curve shifted to the left to match that seen in unstressed females but plateaued at a lower level. Together, the findings suggested that the CRF receptor (CRFr), which mediates LC activation by CRF, signals and/or is trafficked differently in male and female rats.

This study was designed to identify the molecular basis for sex differences in neuronal sensitivity to CRF. Because CRFr signaling occurs primarily through its coupling to the GTP-binding protein, Gs, receptor immunoprecipitation was used to determine whether CRFr-Gs coupling differed in male and female rats.27 To examine potential sex differences in CRFr trafficking, CRFr phosphorylation and association with β-arrestin2 were compared, as these are important steps in the CRFr internalization process.28, 29 To confirm that the molecular events had cellular consequences, immunoelectron microscopy was used to visualize cellular compartmentalization of the receptor and stress-induced internalization. The results converged to reveal sexual dimorphism in CRFr function at molecular and cellular levels that could contribute to the higher incidence of certain stress-related psychiatric disorders in female rats.

Materials and methods


The subjects were male and female Sprague–Dawley rats (Charles River, Wilmington, MA, USA). Females were intact or ovariectomized by the vendor at 42 days. Rats were approximately 47 days of age when shipped and used approximately 2 weeks after arrival. Shipments of male and female rats were age matched. See Supplementary Information Methods for details on subjects, housing conditions and tracking the estrous cycle. Care and use of animals was approved by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and was in accordance with the NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.


Extracellular single unit LC activity was recorded in the halothane-anesthetized state 24 h after a 15 min swim stress or brief handling as described.26 The 24 h timepoint was chosen to correspond to the time that sex differences in stress regulation of LC neuronal sensitivity to CRF were observed.26 Surgery and procedures for LC recording coupled with drug microinfusion were as previously described with modifications detailed in Supplementary Information Methods.26 Artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF) or the cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP)/protein kinase A antagonist, Rp-cAMP-S (adenosine-3′, 5′-cyclic monophosphorothioate, Rp-isomer, triethylammonium salt), was microinfused into the LC (600 ng in 120 nl ACSF) 20–40 min before CRF (1–30 ng in 30 nl ACSF). LC activity was recorded at least 6 min before and 10 min after CRF. Only one dose of CRF was tested on a single cell and only one cell was tested in an individual rat. Recording sites were histologically identified as previously described.26

CRFr immunoprecipitation

Tissue was usually collected 24 h after stress or handling, to match electrophysiological timepoints. For receptor phosphorylation and β-arrestin2 studies tissue also was collected immediately after and 1 h after stressor exposure. Unanesthetized rats were placed in a flexible plastic restrainer (Decapicone) and rapidly decapitated. Frontal cortex (anterior to the +3.20 AP coordinate, relative to Bregma) was dissected and frozen (−80 °C). Initial studies revealed no sex- or stress-induced differences in cortical CRFr expression indicating that cortical samples prepared for the immunoprecipitation procedure contained comparable amounts of CRFr protein in each group (see Supplementary Information Results). CRFr was immunoprecipitated from three pooled samples for a single determination as detailed in Supplementary Information Methods.

Western blotting

Immunoprecipitated samples (5 μg per condition) were subjected to SDS-PAGE gel electrophoresis and proteins transferred to polyvinylidene fluoride membranes (Immobilon-FL) as described.26 Membranes were probed for specific proteins as previously described with modifications detailed in Supplementary Information Methods.30 Odyssey Infrared Imaging software quantified the integrated intensity of each band and determined molecular weights based on Biorad Precision Plus Protein Standards. The ratio of target protein (Gs, Go, Gq/11, phosphothreonine or β-arrestin2) to CRFr was calculated and the mean ratios were compared between groups using ANOVAs. For the figures, each individual fluorescent channel of the image was adjusted for brightness and contrast using the Odyssey Infrared Imaging Software.

Immunoelectron microscopy

Tissue preparation, immunolabeling and quantification for the immunoelectron microscopy studies were as previously described.31, 32 Immunogold-silver and immunoperoxidase labeling were used to detect CRFr- and tyrosine hydroxylase (TH)-immunoreactivity, respectively. Further details on immunoelectron microscopy methods and quantification are in Supplementary Information (Methods and Figure S3).

Antibody controls

Evidence that the antibodies used are detecting only CRF1 in cortical and LC tissue in these studies is described in detail in Supplementary Information Methods. Thus, CRFr refers to CRF1 in cortical and LC tissue in this study.


CRFr signaling is increased in female and differentially regulated by stress compared to male rats

To determine whether sex differences in LC sensitivity to CRF were related to differences in cAMP-mediated cellular signaling, initial studies assessed the cAMP-dependent component of LC responses to CRF (Figure 1). LC activation by a relatively low CRF dose (3 ng for male rats and the equieffective dose of 1 ng for female rats) or a near maximally effective dose of CRF for both groups (30 ng) was recorded in the presence of the cAMP and protein kinase A antagonist, Rp-cAMP-S or vehicle. As previously reported,26 in the unstressed state, LC neurons of female rats were activated by a dose of CRF that was ineffective in male rats (Figures 1a and b). This response was completely cAMP-dependent because it was abolished by Rp-cAMP-S (Figure 1b). For both sexes, LC activation by the higher dose (30 ng) was mediated by both cAMP-dependent and independent processes (Figures 1a and b). Following swim stress, LC neurons of male rats were activated by a CRF dose (3 ng) that was ineffective in unstressed male rats, confirming previous findings26 (Figure 1c). This sensitized response was completely cAMP-dependent, whereas the neuronal response to the higher dose of CRF (on the plateau) was cAMP-independent (Figure 1c). In contrast to what was seen in male rats, the cAMP-dependent profile in female rats was unchanged by previous stress history (Figure 1d). Finally, there were no significant effects of stress or sex in cAMP-independent signaling.

Figure 1

The role of cAMP signaling in the sex- and stress-related differences in LC neuronal activation by CRF. (a–d) LC activation by local CRF after pretreatment with Rp-cAMP-S (600 ng in 120 nl, intra-LC) or ACSF (120 nl) is shown for unstressed male (n=5–8) and female rats (n=4–6) and male (n=6–8) and female rats 24 h after swim stress (n=4–6). Bars depict the average response to CRF following ACSF (black) or Rp-cAMP-S (dark gray). Light gray bars represent the cAMP-mediated component (calculated by taking the difference between the vehicle and Rp-cAMP-S-treated groups). In the unstressed state, a relatively low CRF dose activated LC neurons in female rats only (t(6)=3.56, P<0.05), and this response was completely cAMP-dependent. For both male and female rats, neuronal responses to the higher dose (30 ng) were mediated by cAMP-dependent and -independent processes (F(1,26)=12.88, P<0.05). Swim stress changed the cAMP signaling profile in male rats (stress × dose × drug interaction (F(1,46)=4.45, P<0.05)), but not in female rats (F(1,39)=1.87, P>0.05).

PowerPoint slide

To determine whether sex differences in neuronal responses to CRF reflected differential CRFr-Gs coupling, the amount of Gs pulled down with immunoprecipitated CRFr was quantified. The quantity of protein required for receptor immunoprecipitation necessitated the use of cortical tissue for these studies. Notably, the CRF1 receptor that is thought to mediate LC activation is in high density in the cortex and linked to the cAMP-signaling pathway.33, 34, 35, 36 Receptor binding and in situ hybridization studies suggest that this is the sole CRF receptor subtype in cortex and a lack of staining with a CRF2 receptor antibody supported this33, 37 (see Supplementary Figures S2, S3 in Supplementary Information). Figure 2 shows representative blots of immunoprecipitated CRFr and the associated Gs protein pulled down in the different experimental groups. In the unstressed condition, the amount of Gs protein immunoprecipitated with CRFr was significantly greater for female (either ovariectomized or intact) compared to male rats, indicating greater CRFr-Gs coupling in female rats (Figures 2a and d). This mirrors the electrophysiological findings of an increased neuronal response of female rats to low doses of CRF 26 (Figures 1a and b).

Figure 2

Sex- and stress-related differences in CRFr association with different G proteins. (a–c) Representative blots of immunoprecipitated CRFr (green, MW=52 kDa) from different groups and (a) the Gs protein (red, MW=48 kDa), (b) the Go protein (red, MW=40 kDa) and (c) the Gq/11 protein (red, MW=40 kDa). So that the presentation in a, matched that in b and c, a lane containing the molecular weight marker that was between female and male samples on the same gel was deleted and the image of male samples that were to the right of this lane were moved to the left of female samples. (d–f) Graphs show the mean ratio of the integrated intensity of each band of G proteins to the corresponding band of CRFr from the same samples (n=4–6 determinations, pooled 3 rats per determination). CRFr-Gs coupling was greater in unstressed ovariectomized and intact females compared to unstressed males (F(5,26)=2.56, P<0.05, post hocs P<0.05). Stress increased coupling in males (P<0.05) to a level comparable to that of unstressed females (P>0.05), but had no further effect on females (regardless of hormonal status; P>0.05). There were no significant differences in coupling of the CRFr to Go (F(3,20)=0.55, P>0.05) or Gq/11 (F(3,12)=0.55, p>0.05) (top band quantified). Data are represented as the mean (±SEM). Number sign indicates sex difference under basal (unstressed) conditions (that is, greater coupling in unstressed females vs unstressed males; P<0.05). Asterisks indicate a significant stress-induced increase compared to the unstressed same sex control (P<0.05).

PowerPoint slide

Swim stress increased CRFr-Gs coupling in male rats to a level comparable to that of unstressed female rats (Figures 2a and d) and this occurred at the same time that LC neuronal sensitivity to low doses of CRF was increased in male rats26 (Figure 1c). Swim stress did not significantly alter CRFr-Gs coupling in female rats (Figures 2a and d). CRFr-Gs association was comparable in ovariectomized and intact female rats in both stressed and unstressed conditions, suggesting no contribution of circulating ovarian hormones to this effect. These biochemical results in the cortex match the electrophysiological findings in the LC and suggest that enhanced neuronal responses to CRF in female and stressed male rats result from increased CRFr-Gs coupling.

There were no sex or stress-related differences in CRFr association with either Go or Gq/11 (Figures 2b, c, e and f). This is consistent with a lack of sex or stress differences in the non-cAMP-mediated component of the electrophysiological response to CRF and underscores the contribution of CRFr-Gs coupling to sex differences in CRFr function (Figure 1).

Stress-elicited association of CRFr to β-arrestin2 is not observed in female rats

The process of receptor internalization regulates cell sensitivity to ligands and agonists of G-protein-coupled receptors.38, 39 CRFr internalization is initiated by phosphorylation of a threonine residue on the carboxy terminus and subsequent binding of β-arrestin2 in cultured cells and primary cortical neurons.28, 29, 40 Sex differences in CRFr phosphorylation were assessed by probing immunoprecipitated CRFr with an antibody directed against phosphothreonine. Merging the channels used to visualize phospothreonine- and CRFr-immunoreactivity revealed an identical band, consistent with detection of the phosphorylated receptor (Figure 3a). There were no sex- or stress-related differences in phosphothreonine labeling of CRFr at any timepoint after swim stress (Figures 3b1–b3).

Figure 3

Sex differences in proteins involved in CRFr internalization processes. (a) Blots represent the phosphothreonine band (red), CRFr band (green) and the merged image (yellow) indicating that both label the same protein (that is, phosphorylated CRFr, MW=52 kDa). Protein for this blot was collected 24 h after stressor exposure. (b1-3) Bar graphs show the mean ratio of phosphothreonine:CRFr for each condition from tissue collected immediately (F(3,12)=0.39, P>0.05), 1 h (F(3,20)=0.58, P>0.05) or 24 h (F(3,20)=0.66, P>0.05) post-stress (n=4–6 determinations, pooled 3 rats per determination). (c) The western blot shows the β-arrestin2 band (MW=54 kDa) and the CRFr band 24 h after stressor exposure or handling. (d1-3) Graphs illustrate the ratio of β-arrestin2:CRFr for rats killed immediately (F(3,12)=0.52, P>0.05), 1 h (F(3,16)=4.74, P<0.05) or 24 h post-stress (F(5,30)=5.77, P<0.05) (n=4–6 determinations, pooled 3 rats per determination). At both 1 and 24 h after stress, β-arrestin2 association with the CRFr was significantly increased in males (P<0.05) but not in female rats (P>0.05). Cycling female rats were included for an additional comparison at the 24 h timepoint, and there was no statistically significant difference in CRFr-β-arrestin2 association between ovariectomized and cycling female rats in either the unstressed or stressed condition (P>0.05). Data are represented as the mean (±s.e.m.). Asterisks indicate a significant effect of stress compared to unstressed same sex control (P<0.05).

PowerPoint slide

Detection of β-arrestin2 in immunoprecipitated samples revealed an effect of both sex and stress on CRFr-β-arrestin2 association (Figures 3c, d1–d3). In the unstressed condition, CRFr-β-arrestin2 association was relatively low and similar in male and female rats. Stress increased CRFr-β-arrestin2 association solely in male rats at 1 h and 24 h after swim stress, consistent with the internalization process (Figure 3d1–d3).32 In contrast, stress failed to increase CRFr-β-arrestin2 association in female rats at any timepoint, suggesting that the important adaptive process of CRFr internalization may be compromised in female rats (Figures 3d1–d3). CRFr-β-arrestin2 association was similar in ovariectomized and intact female rats in either unstressed or stressed conditions.

Stress-elicited CRFr internalization is not observed in females

Immunoelectron microscopy was used to compare the cellular localization of CRFr between groups. Immunogold–silver-labeled CRFr was identified in LC dendrites in both male and female rats (Figures 4a–c). CRFr was found within TH-labeled dendrites of female rats as has been shown for LC neurons of male rats32 (Figures 4c1 and c2). Consistent with previous reports,32 in unstressed male rats CRFr was more prevalent on the plasma membrane. In contrast, in unstressed female rats CRFr was predominantly cytoplasmic (Figures 4a1, b1 and d).

Figure 4

Electron microscopic visualization of CRFr compartmentalization and stress-induced trafficking in LC dendrites. (a–c) are electron photomicrographs of sections through the LC. (a1) LC dendritic profile (d) in an unstressed male rat with immunogold-silver labeling for the CRFr along the plasma membrane (arrowheads). The dendrite receives synaptic contacts from axon terminals (t). (a2) Dendrite from a male rat 24 h following swim stress. CRFr labeling shifts from the plasma membrane to the cytoplasm. (b1) Dendrite from an unstressed female rat shows that CRFr is prominent in the cytoplasm. (b2) Dendrite from a female rat 24 h following swim stress shows that CRFr labeling shifts from the cytoplasm to the plasma membrane. (c1-2) TH-immunoperoxidase-labeled dendrites containing immunogold-silver labeling for CRFr (CRFr+TH) in a female control (c1) and a stressed rat (c2). Arrowheads point to CRFr on the plasma membrane in c2. Arrows point to immunoperoxidase reaction product. (d) Bar graph indicating the percentage of internalized receptors for each condition (n=3, mean per rat generated from at least 125 dendritic profiles). Unstressed females had a significantly greater percentage of cytoplasmic receptors than unstressed males (F(1,8)=45.3, P<0.05, post hoc, P<0.05). Swim stress increased the percentage of CRFr in cytoplasm in males rats (P<0.05). In contrast, swim stress decreased the percentage of cytoplasmic CRFr in female rats (P<0.05). Data are represented as the mean (±s.e.m.). Number sign indicates sex difference under unstressed conditions (P<0.05). Asterisks indicate a significant effect of stress compared to the unstressed same sex control (P<0.05). Scale bar=500 nm (a–c).

PowerPoint slide

Swim stress induced CRFr internalization in male rats as indicated by a greater ratio of cytoplasmic-to-total silver grains 24 h after stress (Figures 4a2 and d). In contrast, a decreased ratio of cytoplasmic-to-total silver grains was apparent in female rats after swim stress, suggestive of CRFr recruitment to the plasma membrane (Figures 4b2 and d). Together, the immunoelectron microscopy data support the immunoprecipitation and electrophysiological studies suggesting that stress causes CRFr internalization in male rats only.


This study provides convergent evidence for sexual dimorphism in CRFr signaling and trafficking. Receptor immunoprecipitation revealed greater CRFr-Gs coupling in female compared to male rats in unstressed conditions, consistent with a greater sensitivity to CRF determined electrophysiologically. A history of stress increased CRFr-Gs coupling only in male rats to a magnitude comparable to that seen in female rats, mirroring stress-induced changes in neuronal sensitivity to CRF. Sex differences in CRFr-β-arrestin2 association corresponded to sex differences in CRFr trafficking determined by electron microscopy. These results can account for the earlier plateau in the CRF dose–response curve determined in male rats in electrophysiological studies.26 Together, the findings identify molecular and cellular mechanisms that could result in enhanced sensitivity of female rats to CRF and a decreased ability to adapt to excessive CRF. Because hyperactivity of CRF and LC systems are features of certain stress-related disorders that are more prevalent in female rats (for example, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder), these mechanisms may underlie the well recognized vulnerability of female rats to these conditions.

Sex differences in the CRF system and the role of gonadal hormones

Sexual dimorphism of the CRF system has been shown at multiple levels (for review see Vamvakopoulos and Swaab).13, 41 Hypothalamic CRF expression is greater in female humans and rodents, and certain stressors increase hypothalamic CRF exclusively in females.42, 43, 44, 45 Sex differences in CRF expression are established by organizational and activational effects of gonadal hormones. The perinatal testosterone surge organizes sex differences in adult CRF gene expression and mRNA.46, 47 In adulthood, circulating estrogen positively regulates CRF and CRF-binding protein (CRF-BP) mRNA expression through estrogen response elements on their genes.12, 48, 49, 50

This study provides the first evidence for sexual dimorphism at the level of CRFr. Unlike the case for CRF or CRF-BP, circulating gonadal hormones are not involved in sex differences in CRFr function, as indicated by molecular findings of this study or our previous electrophysiological findings.26 Thus, sex differences in CRFr likely result from organizational effects of testosterone at critical developmental periods.

Sex differences in CRFr signaling

LC neurons of male and female rats have comparable spontaneous discharge rates and responses to sensory stimuli.26 However, in the unstressed state, LC neurons of female rats are more sensitive to CRF, as indicated by a shift to the left of the CRF dose–response curve for LC activation compared to that determined in male rats.26 This is physiologically relevant because it translates to enhanced activation of the LC-norepinephrine system by stress.26 Consistent with in vitro studies, a substantial component of LC activation by CRF in vivo is mediated by a cAMP-dependent pathway.51 LC activation in unstressed female rats by a CRF dose that was ineffective in male rats was completely cAMP-dependent. Thus, the greater CRFr-Gs coupling in unstressed female rats revealed by CRFr immunoprecipitation studies accounts for the ability of a low CRF dose to activate LC neurons by a cAMP-dependent mechanism in female and not male rats.

Although it would be ideal to use LC tissue for CRFr immunoprecipitation studies, this was not feasible given the amount of protein required. Because CRF effects on LC neurons are mediated by CRF1, the cortex was an appropriate brain region to use to assess sex differences in LC sensitivity to CRF. CRF1 is abundant in cortex and coupled to Gs and cAMP formation.52, 53 In contrast to hippocampus and amygdala, CRF1 in cortex is not linked to p-ERK1/2 activation.54 The parallel results in these anatomically distinct regions suggest that sex differences in CRFr signaling may be more widespread.

In male rats, previous stress changes the CRF dose–response relationship for LC activation in a complex manner causing a shift to the left in the low-dose range and decreasing the maximum response. This has been documented for repeated shock, repeated intraperitoneal saline injections and swim stress.55, 56, 57 The stress-induced sensitization of male LC neurons to low doses of CRF makes the response comparable to that seen in unstressed females and, as in female rats, this response is completely cAMP dependent. Sex and stress differences in CRFr-Gs coupling mirrored the electrophysiological differences, supporting this as an underlying mechanism for stress-induced neuronal sensitization in male rats.

Sex differences in CRFr internalization

Internalization of G-protein-coupled receptors regulates cell sensitivity to agonists.38, 39 Both agonist- and swim stress-induced CRFr internalization in LC neurons of male rats have been previously documented.31, 32 As time increases from 1 to 24 h after swim stress, CRFr incorporation into multivesicular bodies increases, consistent with receptor downregulation.32 The functional consequence of this is an earlier plateau of the CRF dose–response curve for LC activation in male rats exposed to swim stress.26 The cellular processes involved in CRFr internalization in cultured cells indicate a requirement for phosphorylation of a threonine residue Thr399 on the carboxy tail and recruitment of β-arrestin2.28 The finding that stress did not alter CRFr-threonine phosphorylation may be an indication that stress-induced CRFr internalization in brain requires phosphorylation at other sites on the receptor. Alternatively, the technique used in this study may not be sufficiently sensitive to detect differences in phosphorylation sites that are required for internalization.

Stress increased CRFr-β-arrestin2 association in male rats at 1 and 24 h after stress, times at which CRFr internalization was apparent in LC neurons.32 The inability of swim stress to alter CRFr-β-arrestin2 association in female rats predicted that the internalization process would be impaired and this was confirmed in electron microscopy studies. The finding that CRFr was prominent in the cytoplasm in unstressed females and on the plasma membrane in stressed female rats was unexpected. This could reflect stress-induced recruitment of CRFr to the plasma membrane. Alternatively, it is possible that unstressed female rats produce more receptors that remain cytoplasmic and this is attenuated by stress, effectively increasing the proportion of receptors on the plasma membrane by decreasing the amount in the cytoplasm. Evidence for simultaneous receptor internalization and increased coupling in previously stressed male rats completely accounts for the complex shift in the CRF dose–response curve in male rats with a history of stress (that is, a shift to the left with a decreased maximum response). This suggests that CRFr remaining on plasma membrane after stress is more highly coupled.

Relevance of enhanced CRFr signaling in female rats

Sex differences in CRFr in rat studies should translate to increased sensitivity in rodent models of stress-related psychopathology. However, most rodent models of these disorders use males exclusively and studies using both sexes are equivocal with regard to whether females are more sensitive (for review see Dalla, Palanza and Cryan and Mombereau).58, 59, 60 An important issue is that many of these models (for example, the forced swim test, open field) use an inhibition of motor activity as an endpoint indicative of depressive- or anxiety-like behavior. This is problematic because there are baseline sex differences in activity in many rodent species.60 Moreover it is unclear that a decrease in activity appropriately models the hyperarousal that characterizes melancholic depression and PTSD, and which is thought to involve LC hyperactivity and/or sensitivity.

CRF and stressors shift the mode of LC discharge toward a high tonic-low phasic state that is associated with heightened arousal and a shift from a focused to labile attention that facilitates scanning the environment.61, 62, 63 This is an adaptive behavioral response to acute stress. However, if this response is engaged inappropriately or if it persists, this is expressed as pathology similar to that described in depression or PTSD (for example, hyperarousal, sleep disturbance, inability to concentrate, anxiogenic behaviors). As a result of increased CRFr-Gs coupling, the LC system of females will be activated by stressors (that is, stimuli that release CRF) that are subthreshold for activating the system in male rats. The lack of CRFr internalization in LC neurons of female rats would be translated to an inability to adapt to high levels of CRF as might be produced with chronic stress or in depression, conditions in which CRF hypersecretion is hypothesized.64 The vulnerability of females to depression or PTSD may in part involve this lower threshold for stress-induced activation of the LC-norepinephrine system and the potential for a more persistent activation.


Complementary approaches identified sex differences in two aspects of CRFr function that can contribute to increased CRF sensitivity in female rats. Increased CRFr signaling and compromised internalization would be expressed as increased sensitivity to low levels of CRF and compromised adaptation to high levels of CRF in female rats. This enhanced postsynaptic CRF function may be an important molecular mechanism underlying the vulnerability of women to stress-related psychiatric disorders. Finally, these findings underscore the importance of considering sexual dimorphism in CRFr function in developing CRFr antagonists for the treatment of psychiatric disorders that are more prevalent in females.


  1. 1

    Kessler RC, McGonagle KA, Swartz M, Blazer DG, Nelson CB . Sex and depression in the National Comorbidity Survey. I: Lifetime prevalence, chronicity and recurrence. J Affect Disord 1993; 29: 85–96.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Kessler RC, Sonnega A, Bromet E, Hughes M, Nelson CB . Posttraumatic stress disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1995; 52: 1048–1060.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Marcus SM, Young EA, Kerber KB, Kornstein S, Farabaugh AH, Mitchell J et al. Gender differences in depression: findings from the STAR*D study. J Affect Disord 2005; 87: 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Ter Horst GJ, Wichmann R, Gerrits M, Westenbroek C, Lin Y . Sex differences in stress responses: focus on ovarian hormones. Physiol Behav 2009; 97: 239–249.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Young EA, Altemus M . Puberty, ovarian steroids, and stress. Ann NY Acad Sci 2004; 1021: 124–133.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Young EA . Sex differences in response to exogenous corticosterone: a rat model of hypercortisolemia. Mol Psychiatry 1996; 1: 313–319.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Young EA, Ribeiro SC, Ye W . Sex differences in ACTH pulsatility following metyrapone blockade in patients with major depression. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2007; 32: 503–507.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Gold PW, Wong ML, Chrousos GP, Licinio J . Stress system abnormalities in melancholic and atypical depression: molecular, pathophysiological, and therapeutic implications. Mol Psychiatry 1996; 1: 257–264.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Smith MA, Kling MA, Whitfield HJ, Brandt HA, Demitrack MA, Geracioti TD et al. Corticotropin-releasing hormone: from endocrinology to psychobiology. Horm Res 1989; 31: 66–71.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Gold PW, Chrousos GP . Organization of the stress system and its dysregulation in melancholic and atypical depression: high vs low CRH/NE states. Mol Psychiatry 2002; 7: 254–275.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Strohle A, Holsboer F . Stress responsive neurohormones in depression and anxiety. Pharmacopsychiatry 2003; 36 (Suppl 3): S207–S214.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Vamvakopoulos NC, Chrousos GP . Evidence of direct estrogenic regulation of human corticotropin-releasing hormone gene expression. Potential implications for the sexual dimophism of the stress response and immune/inflammatory reaction. J Clin Invest 1993; 92: 1896–1902.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Vamvakopoulos NV . Sexual dimorphism of stress response and immune/ inflammatory reaction: the corticotropin releasing hormone perspective. Mediators Inflamm 1995; 4: 163–174.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Vale W, Spiess J, Rivier C, Rivier J . Characterization of a 41-residue ovine hypothalamic peptide that stimulates secretion of corticotropin and beta-endorphin. Science 1981; 213: 1394–1397.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Bale TL, Vale WW . CRF and CRF receptors: role in stress responsivity and other behaviors. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2004; 44: 525–557.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Owens MJ, Nemeroff CB . Physiology and pharmacology of corticotropin-releasing factor. Pharmacol Rev 1991; 43: 425–473.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Van Bockstaele EJ, Colago EE, Valentino RJ . Corticotropin-releasing factor-containing axon terminals synapse onto catecholamine dendrites and may presynaptically modulate other afferents in the rostral pole of the nucleus locus coeruleus in the rat brain. J Comp Neurol 1996; 364: 523–534.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Van Bockstaele EJ, Colago EE, Valentino RJ . Amygdaloid corticotropin-releasing factor targets locus coeruleus dendrites: substrate for the co-ordination of emotional and cognitive limbs of the stress response. J Neuroendocrinol 1998; 10: 743–757.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Valentino RJ, Van Bockstaele E . Convergent regulation of locus coeruleus activity as an adaptive response to stress. Eur J Pharmacol 2008; 583: 194–203.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Aston-Jones G, Rajkowski J, Kubiak P, Valentino RJ, Shipley MT . Role of the locus coeruleus in emotional activation. Prog Brain Res 1996; 107: 380–402.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Page ME, Berridge CW, Foote SL, Valentino RJ . Corticotropin-releasing factor in the locus coeruleus mediates EEG activation associated with hypotensive stress. Neurosci Lett 1993; 164: 81–84.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Lechner SM, Curtis AL, Brons R, Valentino RJ . Locus coeruleus activation by colon distention: role of corticotropin-releasing factor and excitatory amino acids. Brain Res 1997; 756: 114–124.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Wong ML, Kling MA, Munson PJ, Listwak S, Licinio J, Prolo P et al. Pronounced and sustained central hypernoradrenergic function in major depression with melancholic features: relation to hypercortisolism and corticotropin-releasing hormone. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000; 97: 325–330.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    O′Donnell T, Hegadoren KM, Coupland NC . Noradrenergic mechanisms in the pathophysiology of post-traumatic stress disorder. Neuropsychobiology 2004; 50: 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Southwick SM, Bremner JD, Rasmusson A, Morgan III CA, Arnsten A, Charney DS . Role of norepinephrine in the pathophysiology and treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder. Biol Psychiatry 1999; 46: 1192–1204.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Curtis AL, Bethea T, Valentino RJ . Sexually dimorphic responses of the brain norepinephrine system to stress and corticotropin-releasing factor. Neuropsychopharmacology 2006; 31: 544–554.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Hillhouse EW, Grammatopoulos DK . The molecular mechanisms underlying the regulation of the biological activity of corticotropin-releasing hormone receptors: implications for physiology and pathophysiology. Endocr Rev 2006; 27: 260–286.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Teli T, Markovic D, Levine MA, Hillhouse EW, Grammatopoulos DK . Regulation of corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor type 1alpha signaling: structural determinants for G protein-coupled receptor kinase-mediated phosphorylation and agonist-mediated desensitization. Mol Endocrinol 2005; 19: 474–490.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Oakley RH, Olivares-Reyes JA, Hudson CC, Flores-Vega F, Dautzenberg FM, Hauger RL . Carboxyl-terminal and intracellular loop sites for CRF1 receptor phosphorylation and beta-arrestin-2 recruitment: a mechanism regulating stress and anxiety responses. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2007; 293: R209–R222.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Carr GV, Bangasser DA, Bethea T, Young M, Valentino RJ, Lucki I . Antidepressant-Like Effects of kappa-Opioid Receptor Antagonists in Wistar Kyoto Rats. Neuropsychopharmacology 2009; 35: 752–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Reyes BA, Fox K, Valentino RJ, Van Bockstaele EJ . Agonist-induced internalization of corticotropin-releasing factor receptors in noradrenergic neurons of the rat locus coeruleus. Eur J Neurosci 2006; 23: 2991–2998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Reyes BA, Valentino RJ, Van Bockstaele EJ . Stress-induced intracellular trafficking of corticotropin-releasing factor receptors in rat locus coeruleus neurons. Endocrinology 2008; 149: 122–130.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Rominger DH, Rominger CM, Fitzgerald LW, Grzanna R, Largent BL, Zaczek R . Characterization of [125I]sauvagine binding to CRH2 receptors: membrane homogenate and autoradiographic studies. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1998; 286: 459–468.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Chen FM, Bilezikjian LM, Perrin MH, Rivier J, Vale W . Corticotropin releasing factor receptor-mediated stimulation of adenylate cyclase activity in the rat brain. Brain Res 1986; 381: 49–57.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Battaglia G, Webster EL, De Souza EB . Characterization of corticotropin-releasing factor receptor-mediated adenylate cyclase activity in the rat central nervous system. Synapse 1987; 1: 572–581.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    De Souza EB . Corticotropin-releasing factor receptors: physiology, pharmacology, biochemistry and role in central nervous system and immune disorders. Psychoneuroendocrinology 1995; 20: 789–819.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Van Pett K, Viau V, Bittencourt JC, Chan RK, Li HY, Arias C et al. Distribution of mRNAs encoding CRF receptors in brain and pituitary of rat and mouse. J Comp Neurol 2000; 428: 191–212.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Premont RT . Once and future signaling: G protein-coupled receptor kinase control of neuronal sensitivity. Neuromolecular Med 2005; 7: 129–147.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Krupnick JG, Benovic JL . The role of receptor kinases and arrestins in G protein-coupled receptor regulation. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1998; 38: 289–319.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Holmes KD, Babwah AV, Dale LB, Poulter MO, Ferguson SS . Differential regulation of corticotropin releasing factor 1alpha receptor endocytosis and trafficking by beta-arrestins and Rab GTPases. J Neurochem 2006; 96: 934–949.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Swaab DF, Bao AM, Lucassen PJ . The stress system in the human brain in depression and neurodegeneration. Ageing Res Rev 2005; 4: 141–194.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Frederiksen SO, Ekman R, Gottfries CG, Widerlov E, Jonsson S . Reduced concentrations of galanin, arginine vasopressin, neuropeptide Y and peptide YY in the temporal cortex but not in the hypothalamus of brains from schizophrenics. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1991; 83: 273–277.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Viau V, Bingham B, Davis J, Lee P, Wong M . Gender and puberty interact on the stress-induced activation of parvocellular neurosecretory neurons and corticotropin-releasing hormone messenger ribonucleic acid expression in the rat. Endocrinology 2005; 146: 137–146.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Iwasaki-Sekino A, Mano-Otagiri A, Ohata H, Yamauchi N, Shibasaki T . Gender differences in corticotropin and corticosterone secretion and corticotropin-releasing factor mRNA expression in the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus and the central nucleus of the amygdala in response to footshock stress or psychological stress in rats. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2009; 34: 226–237.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Desbonnet L, Garrett L, Daly E, McDermott KW, Dinan TG . Sexually dimorphic effects of maternal separation stress on corticotrophin-releasing factor and vasopressin systems in the adult rat brain. Int J Dev Neurosci 2008; 26: 259–268.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Patchev VK, Hayashi S, Orikasa C, Almeida OF . Ontogeny of gender-specific responsiveness to stress and glucocorticoids in the rat and its determination by the neonatal gonadal steroid environment. Stress 1999; 3: 41–54.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Seale JV, Wood SA, Atkinson HC, Harbuz MS, Lightman SL . Postnatal masculinization alters the HPA axis phenotype in the adult female rat. J Physiol 2005; 563 (Part 1): 265–274.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    van de Stolpe A, Slycke AJ, Reinders MO, Zomer AW, Goodenough S, Behl C et al. Estrogen receptor (ER)-mediated transcriptional regulation of the human corticotropin-releasing hormone-binding protein promoter: differential effects of ERalpha and ERbeta. Mol Endocrinol 2004; 18: 2908–2923.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Bohler Jr HC, Zoeller RT, King JC, Rubin BS, Weber R, Merriam GR . Corticotropin releasing hormone mRNA is elevated on the afternoon of proestrus in the parvocellular paraventricular nuclei of the female rat. Brain Res Mol Brain Res 1990; 8: 259–262.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Speert DB, SJ MC, Seasholtz AF . Sexually dimorphic expression of corticotropin-releasing hormone-binding protein in the mouse pituitary. Endocrinology 2002; 143: 4730–4741.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    Jedema HP, Grace AA . Corticotropin-releasing hormone directly activates noradrenergic neurons of the locus ceruleus recorded in vitro. J Neurosci 2004; 24: 9703–9713.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Potter E, Sutton S, Donaldson C, Chen R, Perrin M, Lewis K et al. Distribution of corticotropin-releasing factor receptor mRNA expression in the rat brain and pituitary. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994; 91: 8777–8781.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53

    Grammatopoulos DK, Randeva HS, Levine MA, Kanellopoulou KA, Hillhouse EW . Rat cerebral cortex corticotropin-releasing hormone receptors: evidence for receptor coupling to multiple G-proteins. J Neurochem 2001; 76: 509–519.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54

    Refojo D, Echenique C, Muller MB, Reul JM, Deussing JM, Wurst W et al. Corticotropin-releasing hormone activates ERK1/2 MAPK in specific brain areas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102: 6183–6188.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55

    Curtis AL, Pavcovich LA, Grigoriadis DE, Valentino RJ . Previous stress alters corticotropin-releasing factor neurotransmission in the locus coeruleus. Neuroscience 1995; 65: 541–550.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56

    Valentino RJ, Van Bockstaele EJ . Functional interactions between stress neuromediator and the locus coeruleur-noradrenaline system. In: Steckler TK, N. (ed). Handbook of Stress and the Brain. Elsevier: The Netherlands, 2005 pp 465–486.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57

    Curtis AL, Pavcovich LA, Valentino RJ . Long-term regulation of locus ceruleus sensitivity to corticotropin-releasing factor by swim stress. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1999; 289: 1211–1219.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. 58

    Dalla C, Pitychoutis PM, Kokras N, Papadopoulou-Daifoti Z . Sex differences in animal models of depression and antidepressant response. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2009; 106: 226–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59

    Palanza P . Animal models of anxiety and depression: how are females different? Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2001; 25: 219–233.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60

    Cryan JF, Mombereau C . In search of a depressed mouse: utility of models for studying depression-related behavior in genetically modified mice. Mol Psychiatry 2004; 9: 326–357.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61

    Aston-Jones G, Rajkowski J, Cohen J . Locus coeruleus and regulation of behavioral flexibility and attention. Prog Brain Res 2000; 126: 165–182.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62

    Aston-Jones G, Cohen JD . An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annu Rev Neurosci 2005; 28: 403–450.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63

    Berridge CW, Waterhouse BD . The locus coeruleus-noradrenergic system: modulation of behavioral state and state-dependent cognitive processes. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 2003; 42: 33–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64

    Nemeroff CB . The corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) hypothesis of depression: new findings and new directions. Mol Psychiatry 1996; 1: 336–342.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was supported by USPHS Grant MH40008 to RJV, and MH014654 and MH084423 to DAB.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to D A Bangasser.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Molecular Psychiatry website

Supplementary information

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bangasser, D., Curtis, A., Reyes, B. et al. Sex differences in corticotropin-releasing factor receptor signaling and trafficking: potential role in female vulnerability to stress-related psychopathology. Mol Psychiatry 15, 896–904 (2010).

Download citation


  • stress
  • locus ceruleus
  • norepinephrine
  • corticotropin-releasing hormone
  • depression
  • post-traumatic stress disorder

Further reading


Quick links