Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26252475›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Microglial Activation Promotes Cell Survival in Organotypic Cultures of Postnatal Mouse Retinal Explants.

Rosa M Ferrer-Martín, David Martín-Oliva, Ana Sierra-Martín, Maria-Carmen Carrasco, María Martín-Estebané, Ruth Calvente, Sandra M Martín-Guerrero, José L Marín-Teva, Julio Navascués, Miguel A Cuadros

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cell composition at the vitreomacular interface in traumatic macular holes.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Article
  8. Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Microglia in the developing retina.Neural development · 2019
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rosa M Ferrer-MartínDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
David Martín-OlivaDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Ana Sierra-MartínDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Maria-Carmen CarrascoDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
María Martín-EstebanéDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Ruth CalventeDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Sandra M Martín-GuerreroDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
José L Marín-TevaDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Julio NavascuésDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Miguel A CuadrosDepartamento de Biología Celular, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Universidad de Granada · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role of microglia during neurodegeneration remains controversial. We investigated whether microglial cells have a neurotoxic or neuroprotective function in the retina. Retinal explants from 10-day-old mice were treated in vitro with minocycline to inhibit microglial activation, with LPS to increase microglial activation, or with liposomes loaded with clodronate (Lip-Clo) to deplete microglial cells. Flow cytometry was used to assess the viability of retinal cells in the explants and the TUNEL method to show the distribution of dead cells. The immunophenotypic and morphological features of microglia and their distribution were analyzed with flow cytometry and immunocytochemistry. Treatment of retinal explants with minocycline reduced microglial activation and simultaneously significantly decreased cell viability and increased the presence of TUNEL-labeled cell profiles. This treatment also prevented the migration of microglial cells towards the outer nuclear layer, where cell death was most abundant. The LPS treatment increased microglial activation but had no effect on cell viability or microglial distribution. Finally, partial microglial removal with Lip-Clo diminished the cell viability in the retinal explants, showing a similar effect to that of minocycline. Hence, cell viability is diminished in retinal explants cultured in vitro when microglial cells are removed or their activation is inhibited, indicating a neurotrophic role for microglia in this system.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, NewbornCell SurvivalClodronic AcidEscherichia coliFlow CytometryImmunohistochemistryImmunophenotypingLipopolysaccharidesLiposomesMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMicrogliaMinocyclineNeuroprotectionOptic NerveClodronic AcidLipopolysaccharidesLiposomesMinocyclineParp1 protein, mousePoly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase-1Poly(ADP-ribose) PolymerasesTumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID26252475
PMCPMC4529135
OpenAlexW1603259810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.