4.6 Article

Spontaneous calcium waves in Bergman glia increase with age and hypoxia and may reduce tissue oxygen

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2012.175

关键词

aging; astrocytes; energy metabolism; calcium; multiphotonmicroscopy; neuronal-glial interaction

资金

  1. NORDEA Foundation/Center for Healthy Aging
  2. Lundbeck Foundation via the Lundbeck Foundation Center for Neurovascular Signaling (LUCENS)
  3. NOVO-Nordisk Foundation
  4. Danish Medical Research Council
  5. Foundation Leducq

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glial calcium (Ca2+) waves constitute a means to spread signals between glial cells and to neighboring neurons and blood vessels. These waves occur spontaneously in Bergmann glia (BG) of the mouse cerebellar cortex in vivo. Here, we tested three hypotheses: (1) aging and reduced blood oxygen saturation alters wave activity; (2) glial Ca2+ waves change cerebral oxygen metabolism; and (3) neuronal and glial wave activity is correlated. We used two-photon microscopy in the cerebellar cortexes of adult (8- to 15-week-old) and aging (48- to 80-week-old) ketamine-anesthetized mice after bolus loading with OGB-1/AM and SR101. We report that the occurrence of spontaneous waves is 20 times more frequent in the cerebellar cortex of aging as compared with adult mice, which correlated with a reduction in resting brain oxygen tension. In adult mice, spontaneous glial wave activity increased on reducing resting brain oxygen tension, and ATP-evoked glial waves reduced the tissue O-2 tension. Finally, although spontaneous Purkinje cell (PC) activity was not associated with increased glia wave activity, spontaneous glial waves did affect intracellular Ca2+ activity in PCs. The increased wave activity during aging, as well as low resting brain oxygen tension, suggests a relationship between glial waves, brain energy homeostasis, and pathology. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2013) 33, 161-169; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2012.175; published online 5 December 2012

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据