4.7 Article

Renin Lineage Cells Repopulate the Glomerular Mesangium after Injury

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2014030265

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [HU-600/6-1, TO 679/1-1, SFB 699/B1, HO-2522/6-1]
  2. Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R01DK091330] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mesangial cell injury has a major role in many CKDs. Because renin-positive precursor cells give rise to mesangial cells during nephrogenesis, this study tested the hypothesis that the same phenomenon contributes to glomerular regeneration after murine experimental mesangial injury. Mesangiolysis was induced by administration of an anti-mesangial cell serum in combination with LPS. In enhanced green fluorescent protein-reportermice with constitutively labeled renin lineage cells, the size of the enhanced green fluorescent protein-positive area in the glomerular tufts increased after mesangial injury. Furthermore, we generated a novel Tet-on inducible triple-transgenic LacZ reporter line that allowed selective labeling of renin cells along renal afferent arterioles of adult mice. Although no intraglomerular LacZ expression was detected in healthy mice, about two-thirds of the glomerular tufts became LacZ positive during the regenerative phase after severe mesangial injury. Intraglomerular renin descendant LacZ-expressing cells colocalized with mesangial cell markers alpha 8-integrin and PDGF receptor-beta but not with endothelial, podocyte, or parietal epithelial cell markers. In contrast with LacZ-positive cells in the afferent arterioles, LacZ-positive cells in the glomerular tuft did not express renin. These data demonstrate that extraglomerular renin lineage cells represent a major source of repopulating cells for reconstitution of the intraglomerular mesangium after injury.

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

4.7
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