These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cloning and characteristics of fish glial fibrillary acidic protein: implications for optic nerve regeneration.
    Author: Cohen I, Shani Y, Schwartz M.
    Journal: J Comp Neurol; 1993 Aug 15; 334(3):431-43. PubMed ID: 8376626.
    Abstract:
    Mammalian central nervous system neurons do not regenerate after axonal injury, unlike their counterparts in fish and amphibians. After axonal injury, glial cells in mammals do not support regrowth of axons, while in fish they support the regeneration process. Controversy exists as to whether or not the intact fish optic nerve expresses glial fibrillary acidic protein, a well-known marker for mature astrocytes, and thus whether its astrocytes differ in this respect from those of the brain and spinal cord, as well as from optic nerve astrocytes of other species. In an attempt to resolve this question we cloned fish glial fibrillary acidic protein. Two different complementary DNA clones were isolated from a carp brain complementary DNA library, each encoding a different form of glial fibrillary acidic protein apparently originating from different genes. Monospecific polyclonal antibodies were raised against a peptide synthesized according to the predicted amino acid sequence, and used to identify and localize the fish glial fibrillary acidic protein. Two glial fibrillary acidic proteins (of 49 kDa and 51 kDa) were identified by the antibodies in all tested fish central nervous system tissues. The antibodies were then used to examine glial fibrillary acidic protein immunoreactivity in sections taken from uninjured and injured optic nerves of goldfish. Injury was followed by an elevation in glial fibrillary acidic protein immunoreactivity along the whole length of the nerve, except at the site of the injury, where--as in the case of vimentin--no immunoreactivity was detectable. However, in contrast to vimentin-positive glial cells, which repopulate the site of the injury soon after the optic nerve is injured, glial fibrillary acidic protein-positive glial cells remained outside the injury site for as long as 6 weeks after the injury. Despite the injury-induced changes in glial fibrillary acidic protein immunoreactivity, no change was observed in the level of transcript encoding glial fibrillary acidic protein after injury, while there was an increase in the amount of glial fibrillary acidic protein associated with the cytoskeleton and a reduction in the soluble form. These results suggest that the injury-induced changes in immunoreactivity on sections involve changes not in transcription or translation of glial fibrillary acidic protein, but in glial fibrillary acidic protein compartmentalization.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]