May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Preliminary Analysis of the Developmental Genetics of Ganglion Cell Regeneration in Zebrafish
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S.D. Spritzer
    Biology, Univ Idaho, Moscow, ID
  • D.E. Mallory
    Biology, Univ Idaho, Moscow, ID
  • J. Sand
    Biology, Univ Idaho, Moscow, ID
  • D.L. Stenkamp
    Biology, Univ Idaho, Moscow, ID
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S.D. Spritzer, None; D.E. Mallory, None; J. Sand, None; D.L. Stenkamp, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  The Glaucoma Foundation, NSF REU, NIH BRIN Idaho
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 3223. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S.D. Spritzer, D.E. Mallory, J. Sand, D.L. Stenkamp; Preliminary Analysis of the Developmental Genetics of Ganglion Cell Regeneration in Zebrafish . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):3223.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: Adult teleost fish have the capacity to regenerate neurons lost due to trauma. When the retina is destroyed using the chemical agent ouabain, proliferative cells within the retina generate new retinal neurons (Raymond et al. 2000). Previous studies have revealed that cell–specific gene expression in regenerated retina is similar to that seen in embryonic retinal development (e.g. Hitchcock et al., 1992), while spatial patterning of the regenerated retina is distinct (Stenkamp et al., 2001). The purpose of this study is to determine if the temporal genetic cascade expressed during regeneration of a specific cell type, the ganglion cells (GCs), is similar to that expressed during retinal development. Methods: Zebrafish were anaesthetized and injected intraocularly with ouabain, then were sacrificed at time intervals of 6, 8, 12, 20, 40, and 80+ days post injection (dpi). Retinal damage was verified by monitoring the dorsal light reflex. Treated and injected eyes were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and frozen for cryosectioning. Sections were processed for in situ hybridization or immunocytochemistry for expression of the following markers: ath5 (expressed transiently in retinal progenitor cells and required for GC formation; Kay et al., 2001), pax6 (expressed in retinal progenitor cells and mature GCs in normal and regenerated retina; Hitchcock et al., 1996), and zn–12 (a marker of GCs and neuronal processes expressed immediately prior to GC terminal mitosis and persisting thereafter; Hu and Easter, 1999). Results: At 6 dpi, putative regenerative cells lined the retinal pigmented epithelium, but lacked lamination and had a neuroepithelial appearance. Ath5 and pax6 were sporadically localized to this regenerating tissue, but the zn–12 marker was predominantly associated with cellular debris elsewhere in the eye. At 8 dpi, ath5 was no longer expressed in regenerating retina, while pax6 expression persisted in a location consisting with the location of GCs. The zn–12 marker was expressed at this time in a pattern consistent with the location of GCs and neuronal processes, though this pattern revealed lamination abnormalities within the regenerating tissue. At 12 dpi and beyond, regenerating retina showed a zn–12 expression pattern indicating appropriate retinal structure. Conclusions: These preliminary data suggest that the broad temporal features of developmental genetics of GCs are recapitulated during retinal regeneration. However, the spatial patterns of zn–12 are not accurately recapitulated early in regeneration. Evaluation of additional GC–specific markers is underway. Support: The Glaucoma Foundation; NSF REU.

Keywords: ganglion cells • regeneration • gene/expression 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.