4.6 Article

Distinct effects of inflammation on preconditioning and regeneration of the adult zebrafish heart

期刊

OPEN BIOLOGY
卷 6, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsob.160102

关键词

thoracotomy; cryoinjury; cardiac muscle; cardiomyocyte; non-mammalian animal model; leucocytes

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [310030_159995, CRSII3_147675]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [310030_159995, CRSII3_147675] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The adult heart is able to activate cardioprotective programmes and modifies its architecture in response to physiological or pathological changes. While mammalian cardiac remodelling often involves hypertrophic expansion, the adult zebrafish heart exploits hyperplastic growth. This capacity depends on the responsiveness of zebrafish cardiomyocytes to mitogenic signals throughout their entire life. Here, we have examined the role of inflammation on the stimulation of cell cycle activity in the context of heart preconditioning and regeneration. We used thoracotomy as a cardiac preconditioning model and cryoinjury as a model of cardiac infarction in the adult zebrafish. First, we performed a spatio-temporal characterization of leucocytes and cycling cardiac cells after thoracotomy. This analysis revealed a concomitance between the infiltration of inflammatory cells and the stimulation of the mitotic activity. However, decreasing the immune response using clodronate liposome injection, PLX3397 treatment or anti-inflammatory drugs surprisingly had no effect on the re-entry of cardiac cells into the cell cycle. In contrast, reducing inflammation using the same strategies after cryoinjury strongly impaired cardiac cell mitotic activity and the regenerative process. Taken together, our results show that, while the immune response is not necessary to induce cell-cycle activity in intact preconditioned hearts, inflammation is required for the regeneration of injured hearts in zebrafish.

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