ArticleNeuromolecular medicine2020
Driving Neurogenesis in Neural Stem Cells with High Sensitivity Optogenetics.
Article in Neuromolecular medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fetal rat neural progenitor cell transplantation after spinal cord injury improves motor recovery following optogenetic stimulation.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Article
- Aminophylline targets miR-128-3p/Slc7a11 axis to attenuate neuronal ferroptosis after traumatic brain injury.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2025Article
- Optogenetics in Alzheimer's Disease: Focus on Astrocytes.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A Strategy for Magnetic and Electric Stimulation to Enhance Proliferation and Differentiation of NPCs Seeded over PLA Electrospun Membranes.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Neuroprotective Role of Hypothermia in Acute Spinal Cord Injury.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Novel Approaches Used to Examine and Control Neurogenesis in Parkinson's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optogenetic stimulation of neural stem cells (NSCs) enables their activity-dependent photo-modulation. This provides a spatio-temporal tool for studying activity-dependent neurogenesis and for regulating the differentiation of the transplanted NSCs. Currently, this is mainly driven by viral transfection of channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2) gene, which requires high irradiance and complex in vivo/vitro stimulation systems. Additionally, despite the extensive application of optogenetics in neuroscience, the transcriptome-level changes induced by optogenetic stimulation of NSCs have not been elucidated yet. Here, we made transformed NSCs (SFO-NSCs) stably expressing one of the step-function opsin (SFO)-variants of chimeric channelrhodopsins, ChRFR(C167A), which is more sensitive to blue light than native ChR2, via a non-viral transfection system using piggyBac transposon. We set up a simple low-irradiance optical stimulation (OS)-incubation system that induced c-fos mRNA expression, which is activity-dependent, in differentiating SFO-NSCs. More neuron-like SFO-NCSs, which had more elongated axons, were differentiated with daily OS than control cells without OS. This was accompanied by positive/negative changes in the transcriptome involved in axonal remodeling, synaptic plasticity, and microenvironment modulation with the up-regulation of several genes involved in the Ca
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.