Clonal astrocytic response to cortical injury

PLoS One. 2013 Sep 10;8(9):e74039. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074039. eCollection 2013.

Abstract

Astrocytes are a heterogeneous population of glial cells with multifaceted roles in the central nervous system. Recently, the new method for the clonal analysis Star Track evidenced the link between astrocyte heterogeneity and lineage. Here, we tested the morphological response to mechanical injury of clonally related astrocytes using the Star Track approach, which labels each cell lineage with a specific code of colors. Histological and immunohistochemical analyses at 7 days post injury revealed a variety of morphological changes that were different among distinct clones. In many cases, cells of the same clone responded equally to the injury, suggesting the dependence on their genetic codification (intrinsic response). However, in other cases cells of the same clone responded differently to the injury, indicating their response to extrinsic factors. Thus, whereas some clones exhibited a strong morphological alteration or a high proliferative response to the injury, other clones located at similar distances to the lesion were apparently unresponsive. Concurrence of different clonal responses to the injury reveals the importance of the development determining the astrocyte features in response to brain injuries. These features should be considered to develop therapies that affect glial function.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Astrocytes / metabolism
  • Astrocytes / pathology*
  • Biomarkers / metabolism
  • Brain Injuries / etiology
  • Brain Injuries / pathology*
  • Cell Proliferation
  • Cerebral Cortex / pathology*
  • Clone Cells / metabolism
  • Clone Cells / pathology
  • Disease Models, Animal
  • Electroporation
  • Hypertrophy
  • Mice

Substances

  • Biomarkers

Grants and funding

This work was supported by research grant BFU2010-15564 from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.