ArticlePloS one2026
Cone photoreceptor ablation in microglia-deficient larval zebrafish retina elicits a regenerative response alongside a compensatory immune cell response.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Emerging evidence implicates retinal microglia and inflammation as important components impacting the outcome of retinal regeneration, which is spontaneously achieved in zebrafish retina following acute damage but is limited or blocked in mammals. Here we describe the regenerative response in the larval zebrafish retina following ablation of cone photoreceptors. To investigate the role of microglia in the regenerative response, we used irf8st95 heterozygote (microglia-sufficient) and irf8st95 homozygous mutant (microglia-deficient) zebrafish. We compared multiple aspects of the regenerative response in irf8 + /- and irf8-/- larval retinas, including entry of the Müller glia (MG) into the cell cycle, the amplification of MG-derived progenitor cell (MGPC) proliferation, inflammatory and glial reactivity-associated gene expression, and the regeneration of cones. We found only modest impacts to early and late stages of MGPC proliferation and to inflammatory gene expression in irf8 mutants, with no obvious impacts to the regeneration of cones. Notably, we detected a population of immune cells in irf8 mutants that emerged following cone ablation, which expanded in number then were reduced over time, following a trajectory similar to microglia-sufficient siblings but at markedly reduced abundance. The immune cells detected in irf8 mutants included a subset with L-plastin/4C4 antibody staining patterns different than those in microglia-sufficient siblings, suggesting distinct origins and/or phenotype compared to resident microglia in controls. The presence of immune cells in irf8 mutants following cone ablation limited our ability to make strong conclusions about the role of microglia in regeneration of cones. However, our results are consistent with several reports that indicate a role for microglia in regulating MGPC proliferation in the regenerating retina. Collectively considered with other reports, our results further indicate that compensatory responses, which may include different immune cells and/or signaling from other retinal cell types such as Müller glia, may be elicited in microglia-deficient retinas upon neuronal damage.
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.