Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26230763›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2015

Myocyte Dedifferentiation Drives Extraocular Muscle Regeneration in Adult Zebrafish.

Alfonso Saera-Vila, Daniel S Kasprick, Tyler L Junttila, Steven J Grzegorski, Ke'ale W Louie, Estelle F Chiari, Phillip E Kish, Alon Kahana

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. All for One and One for All: Regenerating Skeletal Muscle.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Autophagy in animal development.Cell death and differentiation · 2020
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Extraocular Muscle Repair and Regeneration.Current ophthalmology reports · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alfonso Saera-Vila
Daniel S Kasprick
Tyler L Junttila
Steven J Grzegorski
Ke'ale W Louie
Estelle F Chiari
Phillip E Kish
Alon Kahana

Funding

XenograftP30CA046592 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI THEODORE S LAWRENCE · 1988 to 2026
$178.2M
ZEBRAFISH INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE CENTERP40RR012546 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI WESTERFIELD, MONTE · 1998 to 2011
$21.9M
VIVARIUM MODULEP30EY007003 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI David Antonetti · 1987 to 2026
$17.6M
Tissue Engineering and RegenerationT32DE007057 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DAVID H. KOHN · 1985 to 2026
$17.3M
A Zebrafish model of extraocular muscle regeneration.R01EY022633 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI KAHANA, ALON · 2013 to 2016
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046592NCRR NIH HHS P40 RR012546NEI NIH HHS P30 EY007003NEI NIH HHS R01 EY022633NIDCR NIH HHS T32 DE007057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to characterize the injury response of extraocular muscles (EOMs) in adult zebrafish.

methodsAdult zebrafish underwent lateral rectus (LR) muscle myectomy surgery to remove 50% of the muscle, followed by molecular and cellular characterization of the tissue response to the injury.

resultsFollowing myectomy, the LR muscle regenerated an anatomically correct and functional muscle within 7 to 10 days post injury (DPI). Following injury, the residual muscle stump was replaced by a mesenchymal cell population that lost cell polarity and expressed mesenchymal markers. Next, a robust proliferative burst repopulated the area of the regenerating muscle. Regenerating cells expressed myod, identifying them as myoblasts. However, both immunofluorescence and electron microscopy failed to identify classic Pax7-positive satellite cells in control or injured EOMs. Instead, some proliferating nuclei were noted to express mef2c at the very earliest point in the proliferative burst, suggesting myonuclear reprogramming and dedifferentiation. Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) labeling of regenerating cells followed by a second myectomy without repeat labeling resulted in a twice-regenerated muscle broadly populated by BrdU-labeled nuclei with minimal apparent dilution of the BrdU signal. A double-pulse experiment using BrdU and 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine (EdU) identified double-labeled nuclei, confirming the shared progenitor lineage. Rapid regeneration occurred despite a cell cycle length of 19.1 hours, whereas 72% of the regenerating muscle nuclei entered the cell cycle by 48 hours post injury (HPI). Dextran lineage tracing revealed that residual myocytes were responsible for muscle regeneration.

conclusionsEOM regeneration in adult zebrafish occurs by dedifferentiation of residual myocytes involving a muscle-to-mesenchyme transition. A mechanistic understanding of myocyte reprogramming may facilitate novel approaches to the development of molecular tools for targeted therapeutic regeneration in skeletal muscle disorders and beyond.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell CycleFollow-Up StudiesImmunohistochemistryMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionMuscle CellsMyoblastsOculomotor MusclesRegenerationZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID26230763
PMCPMC4525682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.