4.5 Article

Lens injury stimulates adult mouse retinal ganglion cell axon regeneration via both macrophage- and lens-derived factors

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 21, 期 7, 页码 2029-2034

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2005.04034.x

关键词

CNS; neurite outgrowth; optic nerve; vitreous body; Zymosan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study the effects of lens injury on retinal ganglion cell axon/neurite re-growth were investigated in adult mice. In vivo, lens injury promoted successful regeneration of retinal ganglion cell axons past the optic nerve lesion site, concomitant with the invasion of macrophages into the eye and the presence of activated retinal astrocytes/Muller cells. In vitro, retinal ganglion cells from lens-lesioned mice grew significantly longer neurites than those from intact mice, which correlated with the presence of enhanced numbers of activated retinal astrocytes/Muller cells. Co-culture of retinal ganglion cells from intact mice with macrophage-rich lesioned lens/vitreous body led to increased neurite lengths compared with co-culture with macrophage-free intact lens/vitreous body, pointing to a neurotrophic effect of macrophages. Furthermore, retinal ganglion cells from mice that had no lens injury but had received intravitreal Zymosan injections to stimulate macrophage invasion into the eye grew significantly longer neurites compared with controls, as did retinal ganglion cells from intact mice co-cultured with macrophage-rich vitreous body from Zymosan-treated mice. The intact lens, but not the intact vitreous body, exerted a neurotrophic effect on retinal ganglion cell neurite outgrowth, suggesting that lens-derived neurotrophic factor(s) conspire with those derived from macrophages in lens injury-stimulated axon regeneration. Together, these results show that lens injury promotes retinal ganglion cell axon regeneration/neurite outgrowth in adult mice, an observation with important implications for axon regeneration studies in transgenic mouse models.

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

4.5
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