ArticlePloS one2022
Analytical methods for assessing retinal cell coupling using cut-loading.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A transpupillary approach for crosslinking Guinea pig sclera using WST11 and near-infrared light.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Biotin-cGMP and -cAMP are able to permeate through the gap junctions of some amacrine cells in the mouse retina despite their large size.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrical coupling between retinal neurons contributes to the functional complexity of visual circuits. "Cut-loading" methods allow simultaneous assessment of cell-coupling between multiple retinal cell-types, but existing analysis methods impede direct comparison with gold standard direct dye injection techniques. In the current study, we both improved an existing method and developed two new approaches to address observed limitations. Each method of analysis was applied to cut-loaded dark-adapted Guinea pig retinae (n = 29) to assess coupling strength in the axonless horizontal cell type ('a-type', aHCs). Method 1 was an improved version of the standard protocol and described the distance of dye-diffusion (space constant). Method 2 adjusted for the geometric path of dye-transfer through cut-loaded cells and extracted the rate of dye-transfer across gap-junctions in terms of the coupling coefficient (kj). Method 3 measured the diffusion coefficient (De) perpendicular to the cut-axis. Dye transfer was measured after one of five diffusion times (1-20 mins), or with a coupling inhibitor, meclofenamic acid (MFA) (50-500μM after 20 mins diffusion). The standard protocol fits an exponential decay function to the fluorescence profile of a specified retina layer but includes non-specific background fluorescence. This was improved by measuring the fluorescence of individual cell soma and excluding from the fit non-horizontal cells located at the cut-edge (p<0.001) (Method 1). The space constant (Method 1) increased with diffusion time (p<0.01), whereas Methods 2 (p = 0.54) and 3 (p = 0.63) produced consistent results across all diffusion times. Adjusting distance by the mean cell-cell spacing within each tissue reduced the incidence of outliers across all three methods. Method 1 was less sensitive to detecting changes induced by MFA than Methods 2 (p<0.01) and 3 (p<0.01). Although the standard protocol was easily improved (Method 1), Methods 2 and 3 proved more sensitive and generalisable; allowing for detailed assessment of the tracer kinetics between different populations of gap-junction linked cell networks and direct comparison to dye-injection techniques.
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.