Dataset Information

Spinal Cord Cells from Pre-metamorphic Stages Differentiate into Neurons and Promote Axon Growth and Regeneration after Transplantation into the Injured Spinal Cord of Non-regenerative Xenopus laevis Froglets.

ABSTRACT: Mammals are unable to regenerate its spinal cord after a lesion, meanwhile, anuran amphibians are capable of spinal cord regeneration only as larvae, and during metamorphosis, this capability is lost. Sox2/3+ cells present in the spinal cord of regenerative larvae are required for spinal cord regeneration. Here we evaluate the effect of the transplantation of spinal cord cells from regenerative larvae into the resected spinal cord of non-regenerative stages (NR-stage). Donor cells were able to survive up to 60 days after transplantation in the injury zone. During the first 3-weeks, transplanted cells organize in neural tube-like structures formed by Sox2/3+ cells. This was not observed when donor cells come from non-regenerative froglets. Mature neurons expressing NeuN and Neurofilament-H were detected in the grafted tissue 4 weeks after transplantation concomitantly with the appearance of axons derived from the donor cells growing into the host spinal cord, suggesting that Sox2/3+ cells behave as neural stem progenitor cells. We also found that cells from regenerative animals provide a permissive environment that promotes growth and regeneration of axons coming from the host. These results suggest that Sox2/3 cells present in the spinal cord of regenerative stage (R-stage) larvae are most probably neural stem progenitor cells that are able to survive, proliferate, self-organize and differentiate into neurons in the environment of the non-regenerative host. In addition, we have established an experimental paradigm to study the biology of neural stem progenitor cells in spinal cord regeneration.

SUBMITTER: Mendez-Olivos EE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5733487 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Spinal Cord Cells from Pre-metamorphic Stages Differentiate into Neurons and Promote Axon Growth and Regeneration after Transplantation into the Injured Spinal Cord of Non-regenerative <i>Xenopus laevis</i> Froglets.

Méndez-Olivos Emilio E EE Muñoz Rosana R Larraín Juan J

Frontiers in cellular neuroscience 20171213

Mammals are unable to regenerate its spinal cord after a lesion, meanwhile, anuran amphibians are capable of spinal cord regeneration only as larvae, and during metamorphosis, this capability is lost. Sox2/3<sup>+</sup> cells present in the spinal cord of regenerative larvae are required for spinal cord regeneration. Here we evaluate the effect of the transplantation of spinal cord cells from regenerative larvae into the resected spinal cord of non-regenerative stages (NR-stage). Donor cells wer ...[more]

PMID: 29326551

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe efficient regenerative abilities at larvae stages followed by a non-regenerative response after metamorphosis in froglets makes Xenopus an ideal model organism to understand the cellular responses leading to spinal cord regeneration.MethodsWe compared the cellular response to spinal cord injury between the regenerative and non-regenerative stages of Xenopus laevis. For this analysis, we used electron microscopy, immunofluorescence and histological staining of the extracellular matrix. We generated two transgenic lines: i) the reporter line with the zebrafish GFAP regulatory regions driving the expression of EGFP, and ii) a cell specific inducible ablation line with the same GFAP regulatory regions. In addition, we used FACS to isolate EGFP+ cells for RNAseq analysis.ResultsIn regenerative stage animals, spinal cord regeneration triggers a rapid sealing of the injured stumps, followed by proliferation of cells lining the central canal, and formation of rosette-like structures in the ablation gap. In addition, the central canal is filled by cells with similar morphology to the cells lining the central canal, neurons, axons, and even synaptic structures. Regeneration is almost completed after 20?days post injury. In non-regenerative stage animals, mostly damaged tissue was observed, without clear closure of the stumps. The ablation gap was filled with fibroblast-like cells, and deposition of extracellular matrix components. No reconstruction of the spinal cord was observed even after 40?days post injury. Cellular markers analysis confirmed these histological differences, a transient increase of vimentin, fibronectin and collagen was detected in regenerative stages, contrary to a sustained accumulation of most of these markers, including chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans in the NR-stage. The zebrafish GFAP transgenic line was validated, and we have demonstrated that is a very reliable and new tool to study the role of neural stem progenitor cells (NSPCs). RNASeq of GFAP::EGFP cells has allowed us to clearly demonstrate that indeed these cells are NSPCs. On the contrary, the GFAP::EGFP transgene is mainly expressed in astrocytes in non-regenerative stages. During regenerative stages, spinal cord injury activates proliferation of NSPCs, and we found that are mainly differentiated into neurons and glial cells. Specific ablation of these cells abolished proper regeneration, confirming that NSPCs cells are necessary for functional regeneration of the spinal cord.ConclusionsThe cellular response to spinal cord injury in regenerative and non-regenerative stages is profoundly different between both stages. A key hallmark of the regenerative response is the activation of NSPCs, which massively proliferate, and are differentiated into neurons to reconstruct the spinal cord. Also very notably, no glial scar formation is observed in regenerative stages, but a transient, glial scar-like structure is formed in non-regenerative stage animals.

Project description:Background: The efficient regenerative abilities at larvae stages followed by a non-regenerative response after metamorphosis in froglets makes Xenopus an ideal model organism to understand the cellular responses leading to spinal cord regeneration. Methods: We compared the cellular response to spinal cord injury between the regenerative and non-regenerative stages of Xenopus laevis. For this analysis, we used electron microscopy, immunofluorescence and histological staining of the extracellular matrix. We generated two transgenic lines: i) the reporter line with the zebrafish GFAP regulatory regions driving the expression of EGFP, and ii) a cell specific inducible ablation line with the same GFAP regulatory regions. In addition, we used FACS to isolate EGFP + cells for RNAseq analysis. Results: In regenerative stage animals, spinal cord regeneration triggers a rapid sealing of the injured stumps, followed by proliferation of cells lining the central canal, and formation of rosette-like structures in the ablation gap. In addition, the central canal is filled by cells with similar morphology to the cells lining the central canal, neurons, axons, and even synaptic structures. Regeneration is almost completed after 20 days post injury. In non-regenerative stage animals, mostly damaged tissue was observed, without clear closure of the stumps. The ablation gap was filled with fibroblast-like cells, and deposition of extracellular matrix components. No reconstruction of the spinal cord was observed even after 40 days post injury. Cellular markers analysis confirmed these histological differences, a transient increase of vimentin, fibronectin and collagen was detected in regenerative stages, contrary to a sustained accumulation of most of these markers, including chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans in the NR-stage. The zebrafish GFAP transgenic line was validated, and we have demonstrated that is a very reliable and new tool to study the role of neural stem progenitor cells (NSPCs). RNASeq of GFAP::EGFP cells has allowed us to clearly demonstrate that indeed these cells are NSPCs. On the contrary, the GFAP::EGFP transgene is mainly expressed in astrocytes in non-regenerative stages. During regenerative stages, spinal cord injury activates proliferation of NSPCs, and we found that are mainly fated to form neurons and glial cells. Specific ablation of these cells abolished proper regeneration, confirming that NSPCs cells are necessary for functional regeneration of the spinal cord. Conclusions: The cellular response to spinal cord injury in regenerative and non-regenerative stages is profoundly different between both stages. A key hallmark of the regenerative response is the activation of NSPCs, which massively proliferate to reconstitute the spinal cord, and are differentiated into neurons. Also very notably, no glial scar formation is observed in regenerative stages, but a transient, glial scar-like structure is formed in non-regenerative stage animals.

Project description:Promoting the combination of robust regeneration of damaged axons and synaptic reconnection of these growing axon populations with appropriate neuronal targets represents a major therapeutic goal following spinal cord injury (SCI). A key impediment to achieving this important aim includes an intrinsic inability of neurons to extend axons in adult CNS, particularly in the context of the chronically-injured spinal cord. We tested whether an inhibitory peptide directed against phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN: a central inhibitor of neuron-intrinsic axon growth potential) could restore inspiratory diaphragm function by reconnecting critical respiratory neural circuitry in a rat model of chronic cervical level 2 (C2) hemisection SCI. We found that systemic delivery of PTEN antagonist peptide 4 (PAP4) starting at 8 weeks after C2 hemisection promoted substantial, long-distance regeneration of injured bulbospinal rostral Ventral Respiratory Group (rVRG) axons into and through the lesion and back toward phrenic motor neurons (PhMNs) located in intact caudal C3-C5 spinal cord. Despite this robust rVRG axon regeneration, PAP4 stimulated only minimal recovery of diaphragm function. Furthermore, re-lesion through the hemisection site completely removed PAP4-induced functional improvement, demonstrating that axon regeneration through the lesion was responsible for this partial functional recovery. Interestingly, there was minimal formation of putative excitatory monosynaptic connections between regrowing rVRG axons and PhMN targets, suggesting that (1) limited rVRG-PhMN synaptic reconnectivity was responsible at least in part for the lack of a significant functional effect, (2) chronically-injured spinal cord presents an obstacle to achieving synaptogenesis between regenerating axons and post-synaptic targets, and (3) addressing this challenge is a potentially-powerful strategy to enhance therapeutic efficacy in the chronic SCI setting. In conclusion, our study demonstrates a non-invasive and transient pharmacological approach in chronic SCI to repair the critically-important neural circuitry controlling diaphragmatic respiratory function, but also sheds light on obstacles to circuit plasticity presented by the chronically-injured spinal cord.

Project description:Spinal cord regeneration is very inefficient in humans, causing paraplegia and quadriplegia. Studying model organisms that can regenerate the spinal cord in response to injury could be useful for understanding the cellular and molecular mechanisms that explain why this process fails in humans. Here, we use Xenopus laevis as a model organism to study spinal cord repair. Histological and functional analyses showed that larvae at pre-metamorphic stages restore anatomical continuity of the spinal cord and recover swimming after complete spinal cord transection. These regenerative capabilities decrease with onset of metamorphosis. The ability to study regenerative and non-regenerative stages in Xenopus laevis makes it a unique model system to study regeneration. We studied the response of Sox2(/)3 expressing cells to spinal cord injury and their function in the regenerative process. We found that cells expressing Sox2 and/or Sox3 are present in the ventricular zone of regenerative animals and decrease in non-regenerative froglets. Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) experiments and in vivo time-lapse imaging studies using green fluorescent protein (GFP) expression driven by the Sox3 promoter showed a rapid, transient and massive proliferation of Sox2(/)3(+) cells in response to injury in the regenerative stages. The in vivo imaging also demonstrated that Sox2(/)3(+) neural progenitor cells generate neurons in response to injury. In contrast, these cells showed a delayed and very limited response in non-regenerative froglets. Sox2 knockdown and overexpression of a dominant negative form of Sox2 disrupts locomotor and anatomical-histological recovery. We also found that neurogenesis markers increase in response to injury in regenerative but not in non-regenerative animals. We conclude that Sox2 is necessary for spinal cord regeneration and suggest a model whereby spinal cord injury activates proliferation of Sox2/3 expressing cells and their differentiation into neurons, a mechanism that is lost in non-regenerative froglets.

Dataset Information

Spinal Cord Cells from Pre-metamorphic Stages Differentiate into Neurons and Promote Axon Growth and Regeneration after Transplantation into the Injured Spinal Cord of Non-regenerative Xenopus laevis Froglets.

Publications

Spinal Cord Cells from Pre-metamorphic Stages Differentiate into Neurons and Promote Axon Growth and Regeneration after Transplantation into the Injured Spinal Cord of Non-regenerative <i>Xenopus laevis</i> Froglets.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets