ArticleNeural development2021
Cellular response to spinal cord injury in regenerative and non-regenerative stages in Xenopus laevis.
Article in Neural development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spinal cord injury induces mitochondrial dysfunction and metabolic reprogramming in non-regenerativeiScience · 2026Article
- Transcriptomics Insights into Spinal Cord Injury for Therapy Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Regrowing the growth zone: metamorphosis kickstarts regeneration in the annelid Capitella teleta.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Spinal Cord Regeneration in Xenopus.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- MicroRNAs in Tissue Regeneration: Lessons from Animal Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Immune Activation Following Spinal Cord Injury: A Review Focused on Inflammatory Changes in the Spinal Cord.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Animal Models of Spinal Cord Injury.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Blueprints for healing: central nervous system regeneration in zebrafish and neonatal mice.BMC biology · 2025Review
- Article
- Thyroid hormone receptor- and stage-dependent transcriptome changes affect the initial period of Xenopus tropicalis tail regeneration.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Rho-Associated Protein Kinase Activity Is Required for Tissue Homeostasis in theJournal of developmental biology · 2024Article
- Neurotrauma-From Injury to Repair: Clinical Perspectives, Cellular Mechanisms and Promoting Regeneration of the Injured Brain and Spinal Cord.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Review
- Tackling the glial scar in spinal cord regeneration: new discoveries and future directions.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Review
- The Stress Response of the Holothurian Central Nervous System: A Transcriptomic Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Mitochondrial function in spinal cord injury and regeneration.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022Review
- New insights into glial scar formation after spinal cord injury.Cell and tissue research · 2022Review
- Developmental and Injury-induced Changes in DNA Methylation in Regenerative versus Non-regenerative Regions of the Vertebrate Central Nervous System.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Temporal and spatial transcriptomic dynamics across brain development in Xenopus laevis tadpoles.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- Radial glia and radial glia-like cells: Their role in neurogenesis and regeneration.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficient regenerative abilities at larvae stages followed by a non-regenerative response after metamorphosis in froglets makes Xenopus an ideal model organism to understand the cellular responses leading to spinal cord regeneration.
methodsWe compared the cellular response to spinal cord injury between the regenerative and non-regenerative stages of Xenopus laevis. For this analysis, we used electron microscopy, immunofluorescence and histological staining of the extracellular matrix. We generated two transgenic lines: i) the reporter line with the zebrafish GFAP regulatory regions driving the expression of EGFP, and ii) a cell specific inducible ablation line with the same GFAP regulatory regions. In addition, we used FACS to isolate EGFP
resultsIn regenerative stage animals, spinal cord regeneration triggers a rapid sealing of the injured stumps, followed by proliferation of cells lining the central canal, and formation of rosette-like structures in the ablation gap. In addition, the central canal is filled by cells with similar morphology to the cells lining the central canal, neurons, axons, and even synaptic structures. Regeneration is almost completed after 20 days post injury. In non-regenerative stage animals, mostly damaged tissue was observed, without clear closure of the stumps. The ablation gap was filled with fibroblast-like cells, and deposition of extracellular matrix components. No reconstruction of the spinal cord was observed even after 40 days post injury. Cellular markers analysis confirmed these histological differences, a transient increase of vimentin, fibronectin and collagen was detected in regenerative stages, contrary to a sustained accumulation of most of these markers, including chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans in the NR-stage. The zebrafish GFAP transgenic line was validated, and we have demonstrated that is a very reliable and new tool to study the role of neural stem progenitor cells (NSPCs). RNASeq of GFAP::EGFP cells has allowed us to clearly demonstrate that indeed these cells are NSPCs. On the contrary, the GFAP::EGFP transgene is mainly expressed in astrocytes in non-regenerative stages. During regenerative stages, spinal cord injury activates proliferation of NSPCs, and we found that are mainly differentiated into neurons and glial cells. Specific ablation of these cells abolished proper regeneration, confirming that NSPCs cells are necessary for functional regeneration of the spinal cord.
conclusionsThe cellular response to spinal cord injury in regenerative and non-regenerative stages is profoundly different between both stages. A key hallmark of the regenerative response is the activation of NSPCs, which massively proliferate, and are differentiated into neurons to reconstruct the spinal cord. Also very notably, no glial scar formation is observed in regenerative stages, but a transient, glial scar-like structure is formed in non-regenerative stage animals.
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.