4.5 Article

Differential vulnerability of propriospinal tract neurons to spinal cord contusion injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE NEUROLOGY
卷 479, 期 4, 页码 347-359

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cne.20319

关键词

LDPT neurons; sparing; regeneration; axonal tract tracing; fluorogold; fluororuby

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The propriospinal system is important in mediating reflex control and in coordination during locomotion. Propriospinal neurons (PNs) present varied patterns of projections with ascending and/or descending fibers. Following spinal cord contusion injury (SCI) in the rat, certain supraspinal pathways, such as the corticospinal tract, appear to be completely abolished, whereas others, such as the rubrospinal and vestibuospinal tracts, are only partially damaged. The amount of damage to propriospinal axons following different severities of SCI is not fully known. In the present study retrograde and anterograde tracing techniques were used to assess the projection patterns of propriospinal neurons in order to determine how this system is affected following SCI. Our findings reveal that PNs have differential vulnerabilities to SCI. While short thoracic propriospinal axons are severely damaged after injury, 5-7% of long descending propriospinal tract (LDPT) projections survive following 50 and 12.5-mm weight drop contusion lesions, respectively, albeit with a reduced intensity of retrograde label. Even though the axons of short thoracic propriospinal cells are damaged, their cell bodies of origin remain intact 2 weeks after injury, indicating that they have not undergone postaxotomy retrograde cell death at this time point. Thus, short PNs may constitute a very attractive population of cells to study regenerative approaches, whereas LDPT neurons with spared axons could be targeted with therapeutic interventions, seeking to enhance recovery of function following incomplete lesions to the spinal cord. J. Comp. Neurol. 479:347-359, 2004. (C) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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