4.7 Article

Ciguatoxin reduces regenerative capacity of axotomized peripheral neurons and delays functional recovery in pre-exposed mice after peripheral nerve injury

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep26809

关键词

-

资金

  1. Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF)
  2. Food and Health Bureau, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government [01122016, 01122026, 12134101]
  3. ECS/GRF grants from the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government [CityU 161212, CityU 160813, CityU 11100015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) results from consumption of tropical reef fish containing ciguatoxins (CTXs). Pacific (P)-CTX-1 is among the most potent known CTXs and the predominant source of CFP in the endemic region responsible for the majority of neurological symptoms in patients. Chronic and persistent neurological symptoms occur in some CFP patients, which often result in incomplete functional recovery for years. However, the direct effects of exposure to CTXs remain largely unknown. In present study, we exposed mice to CTX purified from ciguatera fish sourced from the Pacific region. P-CTX-1 was detected in peripheral nerves within hours and persisted for two months after exposure. P-CTX-1 inhibited axonal regrowth from axotomized peripheral neurons in culture. P-CTX-1 exposure reduced motor function in mice within the first two weeks of exposure before returning to baseline levels. These pre-exposed animals exhibited delayed sensory and motor functional recovery, and irreversible motor deficits after peripheral nerve injury in which formation of functional synapses was impaired. These findings are consistent with reduced muscle function, as assessed by electromyography recordings. Our study provides strong evidence that the persistence of P-CTX-1 in peripheral nerves reduces the intrinsic growth capacity of peripheral neurons, resulting in delayed functional recovery 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