1 1 7I n t h i s i s s u e . . .For many of us, a central tenet of our neurobiological train-ing was that the structure of the brain was fixed, as was thenumber of neurons in the adult brain. This belief was notonly incorrect, but also restricted our understanding of avariety of fundamental processes including learning, adap-tation and maladaptation to stress, development of sus-ceptibility to disease, and resilience. This issue of Dialoguesin Clinical Neuroscience describes the flexible, adaptiveresponses of the brainneuroplasticityand the relevanceof neuroplastic changes to the pathophysiology of neu-ropsychiatric illness, the mechanism of action of psy-chotropic medications, and the transduction of environ-mental factors to changes in brain function.In the State of the art article, Bruce S. McEwen (page 119)provides an introduction to allostasisadaptation tostressand an overview of the structural and cellular con-sequences of stress, its molecular mediators in altering brainstructure, and the kinetics of stress-induced structuralremodeling. The compelling models described make appar-ent the complexity and dynamic nature of adaptation, aswell as the ontogeny of susceptibility to psychiatric illness.In the first Basic research article, Fred H. Gage (page 135)reviews an element of neuroplasticity, neurogenesis, ie, thegeneration of new neurons, and describes the multiplesteps involved in the process of neurogenesis: differentia-tion, commitment, survival, and functional integration. Thiscapacity for self-repair represents one of the therapeuticfrontiers in the treatment of neuropsychiatric illness.In the second Basic research article, Jing Du and col-leagues (page 143) review the evidence suggesting therole of glutamatergically mediated synaptic plasticity inboth the pathophysiology and treatment of affective ill-ness. While focusing on AMPA (a-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionate) and GluR1 (glutamate)receptor trafficking, these authors provide an excellentintroduction to glutamate receptor pharmacology andintracellular signaling as a way of demonstrating both themechanisms of action of mood stabilizers and targets forsubsequent drug development. In one of the Pharmacological aspects articles, RonaldS. Duman (page 157) discusses the effects of stress andantidepressants on neuroplasticity, particularly as theseeffects relate to depression. He focuses on two mediatingsystems that appear to link, at a molecular level, neuro-plasticity, stress, depression, and pharmacotherapy: theneurotrophin BDNF (brain-derived neurotrophic factor),and the cAMP-CREB (cyclic adenosine monophosphate[cAMP]cAMP-response element binding protein) cas-cade. He suggests that the cellular and molecular under-pinnings of structural and functional plasticity offerpromising clues to the pathophysiology of depression andtargets for drug development. In the other Pharmaco-logical aspects article, Eberhard Fuchs and GabrieleFlügge (page 171) describe the pharmacology of thestress response by focusing on changes in monoaminesand monoamine receptors in several animal stress mod-els. They provide a basis for understanding depression asan impairment of synaptic and structural plasticity, withconsequent implications for its treatment.In the first Clinical research article, Craig A. Stockmeierand Grazyna Rajkowska (page 185) describe in detail theneural and glial abnormalities identified in several criticalbrain regions in affective illness. This comprehensive reviewof postmortem studies discusses the possible functionalimplications of abnormalities of cell morphology and dis-tribution and introduces the circuitry that is described inmore detail in the second article by Wayne C. Drevets(page 199). While focusing on neuroimaging studies, heprovides a synthesis of identified neuropathological andimaging abnormalities in affective illness, highlightingthose neural circuits strongly implicated as dysfunctional inaffective disorder. Elucidation of this circuitry at functionaland structural levels will also help illuminate substrates forcomponent processes common to a variety of neuropsy-chiatric disorders.Indeed, in the last article, Dennis S. Charney and his col-leagues (page 217) suggest that studies of neuroplastici-ty will result in a new psychiatric nosology, as well as newtherapeutic targets. Thus, not only will the therapeuticarmamentarium be expanded as we better understandthe mechanics of neuroplasticity, but this better under-standing will also lead to a reconceptualization of howpsychiatric illness is acquired, how it is optimally treated(with attention to both structural and functional ele-ments), and, perhaps most importantly, how resilience isexpressed at cellular and organismic levels.David R. Rubinow, MD