Abstract
Axons of adult neurons in the mammalian central nervous system generally fail to regenerate by themselves, and few if any therapeutic options exist to reverse this situation. Due to a weak intrinsic potential for axon growth and the presence of strong extrinsic inhibitors, retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) cannot regenerate their axons spontaneously after optic nerve injury and eventually undergo apoptosis, resulting in permanent visual dysfunction. Regarding the extracellular environment, research to date has generally focused on glial cells and inflammatory cells, while few studies have discussed the potentially significant role of interneurons that make direct connections with RGCs as part of the complex retinal circuitry. In this study, we provide a novel angle to summarize these extracellular influences following optic nerve injury as “intercellular interactions” with RGCs and classify these interactions as synaptic and non-synaptic. By discussing current knowledge of non-synaptic (glial cells and inflammatory cells) and synaptic (mostly amacrine cells and bipolar cells) interactions, we hope to accentuate the previously neglected but significant effects of pre-synaptic interneurons and bring unique insights into future pursuit of optic nerve regeneration and visual function recovery.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) play a central role in normal vision; their axons collectively form the optic nerve and extend through the chiasm, to innervate the lateral geniculate nucleus, superior colliculi, suprachiasmatic nucleus, and several other nuclei of the di- and mesencephalon [1]. The distant bridge from the retina to the brain renders the optic nerve vulnerable to injury, including traumatic and ischemic optic neuropathy, optic neuritis, and glaucoma, resulting in visual dysfunction and blindness [2]. Unfortunately, as with other central nervous system (CNS) pathways, RGCs have minimal intrinsic capacity to regenerate their axons after traumatic or ischemic injury or degeneration [3]. In addition, unlike the peripheral nervous system, multiple cell-extrinsic inhibitors of axon growth capacity also contribute to regenerative failure. Learning how to surmount these obstacles is the focus of most research aimed at achieving optic nerve regeneration [4, 5].
Traditionally, when referring to the extrinsic environment of regenerating RGC axons, the spotlight is placed on myelin, the glial scar, and inflammation [6, 7], and not on the participation of other retinal neurons. However, the vital role of interneurons in RGC axon regeneration is receiving increasing attention lately. In this review, we summarize these extrinsic influences as “intercellular interactions,” a novel angle that discusses interactions after optic nerve injury between RGCs and other cells, including interneurons, glial cells, and inflammatory cells. For further description, we divide these interactions into two broad categories, namely synaptic and non-synaptic (Fig. 1).
In terms of the non-synaptic interactions, we mainly discuss the relationship between RGCs, glial cells, and inflammatory cells. On the one hand, myelin and glial scars, composed of inhibitory molecules from oligodendrocytes, reactive astrocytes, and microglia, have been demonstrated to mediate the majority of their interactions with RGCs and inhibit axon regeneration following optic nerve injury [7]. On the other hand, neutrophils and macrophages infiltrate the retina after injury and interact with RGCs via various cytokines and neurotrophic factors [8].
The synaptic interactions between RGCs and interneurons and their role in axon regeneration, however, remain a mystery. Previously, RGC death and regeneration were commonly considered to be cell-autonomous or influenced by glia. Recently, however, the importance of synaptic interactions between RGC and interneurons, mostly amacrine cells (ACs), has been realized [9]. Therefore, we summarize recent advances in the interneuron-mediated inhibition of axon regrowth and proposed several hypotheses regarding its potential mechanisms.
In general, we summarize current strategies to promote axon regeneration regarding non-synaptic interactions among retinal cells after optic nerve injury. Furthermore, we aim to draw attention to synaptic interactions between interneurons and RGCs, eventually pointing to a promising future for optic nerve regeneration.
Non-synaptic Interactions with RGCs
Oligodendrocytes and Myelin
Physiologically, myelin guarantees axon insulation, rapid conduction of electrical signals over distance, and metabolic support in the adult nervous system [10]. The myelin of the peripheral nervous system originates from Schwann cells, which provide a permissive environment for axon regeneration. While in the CNS, oligodendrocytes create myelin barriers for axon regeneration by expressing abundant inhibitory myelin-associated molecules [2, 3]. After optic nerve damage, transected or crushed axons are exposed to suppressed myelin-associated molecules. Prototypical myelin-associated inhibitors (MAIs) are mainly derived from oligodendrocytes, including Nogo, myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG), and oligodendrocyte-myelin glycoprotein (OMgp) [11]. MAIs bind to their specific receptors on RGC axons and destabilize the actin cytoskeleton through intracellular downstream signaling, thereby collapsing axon growth cones and impeding axon regeneration [7, 12]. This process serves as the major intercellular interaction between oligodendrocytes and RGCs after optic nerve injury. Herein, we summarize the typical MAIs, their receptors, and related strategies to overcome this inhibition.
Typical Myelin-Associated Inhibitors
Nogo originates from the reticulon family and is expressed predominantly by oligodendrocytes in CNS [13, 14]. Among the three classical Nogo homologs (Nogo-A, Nogo-B, and Nogo-C) [15], Nogo-A has been identified as the dominant inhibitory component in oligodendrocytes and CNS myelin membranes, restricting axon regeneration ability of adult mammalian neurons [16,17,18]. In contrast, Nogo-B and Nogo-C found widespread expression in other tissue apart from the CNS [19]. Nogo-A is a multipass transmembrane protein with distinct molecular structures and growth-retrained regions. Several studies have identified different active sites of Nogo-A, such as NiG-Δ20 and Nogo-66, which are involved in growth cone destruction and neurite outgrowth inhibition [20,21,22].
MAG is the first identified neurite outgrowth inhibitor that belongs to the immunoglobulin gene superfamily [23] and is also selectively produced by oligodendrocytes in the CNS peri-axon membranes of myelin [24, 25]. Two forms of MAG polypeptides (72 and 67 kDa) expressed by a single transcript exist in myelin [26, 27]. MAG was found to bifunctionally regulate axon growth. Initially, researchers discovered that MAG facilitates interactions between glial cells and young neurons, ultimately enhancing neurite outgrowth [28]. However, subsequent studies have argued that MAG impedes neurite extension and activates growth cone retraction of older individuals [29]. Similarly, the influence of MAG on axon regeneration of adult CNS is controversial; the mainstream agrees with the inhibition of MAG, while others do not support its inhibitory role in axon regeneration [30].
OMgp is a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-linked protein that is expressed by oligodendrocytes and neurons in the CNS [31,32,33]. In vitro studies revealed a highly conserved region of OMgp, the leucine-rich repeat (LRR) domain, which is necessary for growth cone collapse, neurite outgrowth inhibition, and cell proliferation [34]. Identical to Nogo and MAG, OMgp also contributes robustly to inhibitory activities associated with CNS myelin through distinct receptors and their attached complexes [35, 36].
Receptors of Typical Myelin-Associated Inhibitors
Nogo receptors (NgR) consist of the founding member NgR1 and its isoforms NgR2 and NgR3, which belong to the GPI-linked LRR protein family [37, 38]. Despite the highly heterogeneous structures of MAIs, they all bind to NgR with similar affinity [33, 39, 40]. The cross-activity of NgR partially stems from the overlapping binding domains of MAIs [41]. NgR1 is expressed by nearly all RGCs [42, 43] and exhibits a major function based on its intact intracellular signaling complex, involving the LRR immunoglobulin-like domain-containing protein 1 (LINGO-1) [44] combined with either p75 neurotrophin receptor (p75NTR) [45,46,47] or tumor necrosis factor receptor orphan Y (TROY) [48]. Later, NgR2 was found to bind MAG with a stronger affinity than NgR1 [49], while NgR3 may function as an NgR1 co-receptor [50]. Furthermore, paired immunoglobulin-like receptor B (PirB), associated with its partner tropomyosin receptor kinase (Trk), serves as another high-affinity receptor for MAIs in collaboration with NgR [51, 52]. Recent studies have implied the existence of PirB in the intact optic nerve and ganglion cell layer and its post-injury upregulation [53].
Interfering with Oligodendrocytes-RGCs Interactions to Promote Optic Nerve Regeneration
Starting with genetic interventions toward MAIs (Table 1), neurite sprouting and axon regrowth have been observed in triple knockout (Nogo-A, MAG, and OMgp) mice after injury [54, 55], while limited axon regeneration occurs when a single or double knockout (MAG and OMgp) is performed [30, 56], suggesting the potentially dominant role of Nogo-A and synergistic actions of MAG and OMgp. However, since Nogo-A is also expressed in neurons, including RGCs [19], subsequent experiments have shown that axon regeneration is not improved in traditional Nogo-A knockout mice, in which both glial and neuronal Nogo-A are deleted [57]. Recent studies indicate that Nogo-A expression in RGCs might enhance axon sprouting after injury and that specifically deleting Nogo-A in oligodendrocytes while preserving RGC Nogo-A could be a promising strategy to promote optic nerve regeneration [58]. Antibody-induced immunoblocking of MAIs also induces post-injury axon regeneration. Nogo-A antibodies, such as monoclonal antibody IN-1 [15], significantly increase axon regeneration in spinal cord injury [59, 60] and optic nerve crush (ONC) mice [61]. Similarly, the inhibitory effects on neurite sprouting are neutralized by MAG antibodies from the soluble fraction of myelin-conditioned media [62, 63].
Manipulations toward receptors have also drawn attention. Although initial genetic deletion of NgR fails to inhibit neurite outgrowth in cultured neurons or promote axon regeneration in mice [72], subsequent experiments have demonstrated that NgR knockout alone is capable of inducing optic nerve regeneration at a moderate level [65, 73]. Transfecting RGCs with adeno-associated viruses (AAV) that express a dominant-negative form of NgR significantly stimulates axon regeneration after optic nerve damage [64]. Meanwhile, a competitive antagonist of NgR1, Nogo-A extracellular peptide (NEP1-40), can promote axon outgrowth in primary RGCs [70]. Intravitreal administration of an NgR blocking decoy, human NgR1(310)-Fc, successfully seals the receptors and regenerates axons in ONC mice [71]. Interfering with PirB activity, either genetically or with antibodies, also leads to partial relief from myelin inhibition, and simultaneously blocking NgR almost completely restores neurite outgrowth potentials in neurons cultured with myelin [51, 69]. Recently, the lateral olfactory tract usher substance (LOTUS), a newly discovered endogenous NgR [74] and PirB [75] antagonist, may become a potential therapeutic target. Studies have demonstrated that AAV-mediated overexpression of membrane-located LOTUS in RGCs blocks the binding between Nogo and NgR [67], and intravitreal injection of the soluble form of LOTUS suppresses the intracellular signal transduction of NgR1 by disturbing the connections between NgR1 and p75NTR [68], both of which significantly promote optic nerve regeneration in vivo.
Other Myelin-Associated Molecules
Semaphorin 4D (Sema4D), also known as CD100, is specifically expressed by oligodendrocytes and is transiently upregulated after optic nerve injury, serving as a novel inhibitory factor for axon regeneration [76]. Plexin B1, a receptor for Sema4D, induces repulsive responses by inactivating PI3K and dephosphorylating Akt and GSK-3β, triggering the collapse of growth cones and impeding axon regeneration [77]. Semaphorin 5A (Sema5A) is explicitly expressed by oligodendrocytes instead of astrocytes [78], and blockage of Sema5A by a neutralizing antibody significantly increases axon regrowth after injury [79, 80]. Ephrin-B3, previously identified as a repellant in axon guidance, accounts for inhibitory activity equivalent to that of the three main MAIs, further contributing to axon growth deficiency and regeneration limitation after CNS trauma [81, 82]. Netrin-1 is another axon guidance factor that is expressed by oligodendrocytes and binds its receptor complex DCC/UNC5 (namely deleted in colorectal cancer and uncoordinated-5) with a dual role during development [83] and inhibiting axon regeneration in the adult CNS [84, 85].
Reactive Astrocytes and Glial Scarring
In response to injuries, the adult CNS initiates a rapid and protective response, also known as reactive astrogliosis or glial scarring, to repair and isolate tissue from secondary damage [86,87,88]. However, multiple studies have now shown that inhibitory molecule deposition in the scar contributes to the chemical barrier of axon regeneration, which is also the primary barrier [89,90,91,92]. Astrocytes, the glial cells that support synapse development, transmission, and plasticity [93], are thought to form molecular barriers of glial scar that prevent the post-injury regeneration of RGC axons [94, 95]. These inhibitory molecules have been demonstrated to include tenascins, semaphorins, ephrins, and, most importantly, chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs). Like MAIs, the inhibitory molecules deposited in the glial scar contribute to the interactions between reactive astrocytes and RGCs after injury by binding to their specific receptors.
Typical Inhibitory Molecules in the Glial Scar
CSPGs belong to a type of proteoglycans that consist of a protein core with adherent glycosaminoglycan (GAG) side chains [96] and serve as the predominant inhibitory components in the glial scar [97,98,99]. After optic nerve injury, CSPGs are secreted into the extracellular environment mainly by reactive astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and macrophages [100, 101]. This secretion leads to a dense and persistent enrichment of CSPGs within the glial scar and specific inhibition of axon regeneration [102]. Administration of the chondroitinase ABC (ChABC) was shown to digest the GAG side chains and attenuate the inhibition of CSPGs [103], suggesting that the inhibitory properties of CSPGs could be attributed to the sulfated sugar GAG chains.
The semaphorin family contains eight classes, including secreted, membrane-associated, and GPI-anchored molecules, all of which conserve a specific “Sema” domain [104]. Accumulation of semaphorins within the glial scar is detected after mature mammalian central nerve injury [105]. Semaphorin 3A (Sema3A), a secreted molecule and a prototype of the semaphorin family, was initially discovered to guide axon growth in the development of the CNS [106]. Sema3A was later found to be upregulated after CNS injury [107], and several researchers have demonstrated that Sema3A is one of the dominant inhibitors of axon regeneration deposited in the glial scar [108, 109].
Tenascins belong to a family of oligomeric glycoproteins deposited in the extracellular environment [110]. The two archetypal glycoproteins of the tenascin family in vertebrates, tenascin-C (TN-C) and tenascin-R (TN-R), are upregulated during development and suppressed in the mature CNS [111], playing crucial roles in the development and pathology situation of the optic nerve. TN-C clumps in the glial scar secreted by reactive astrocytes and exhibits an inhibitory effect on axon regeneration after optic nerve transection [112] and other CNS injuries [113, 114]. Similar outcomes have been observed in goldfish after ONC [115]. TN-R has also been proposed to inhibit optic nerve regrowth and to persist at the lesion site in vitro [116, 117]. Interestingly, however, a shift in the expression levels of TN-R, either reduced or increased, was detected in salamanders [118] and lizards [119] after optic nerve injury.
Receptors of Inhibitory Molecules in the Glial Scar
Studies have indicated that the negative role of CSPGs in axon regeneration is predominantly mediated by two members of the leukocyte common antigen-related (LAR) phosphatase subfamily, transmembrane protein tyrosine phosphatase sigma (PTPσ) receptor and LAR phosphatase [120, 121]. In addition, NgR1 and NgR3 also serve as the functional receptors and mediate the anti-regenerative effects of CSPGs to some extent [65]. Receptors neuropilin 1 (NRP-1) and plexin A1 (PlexA1) serve as the functional co-receptors of Sema3A in neurons [122]. While NRP-1 acts as a binding segment, PlexA1 then activates its GTPase-activating protein domain and initiates downstream signaling pathways [123]. Integrin α9β1 is a transmembrane receptor with the ability to promote neurite outgrowth and axon regeneration [124, 125] when bound to the fibronectin type III domain of TN-C [126]. However, the expression of integrins is decreased in the adult nervous system [127] and even absent after CNS damage, particularly TN-C binding integrin α9β1 [128, 129], eventually eliminating the regenerative properties of TN-C and impeding axons from penetrating the glial scar.
Interfering with Astrocytes-RGCs Interactions to Promote Optic Nerve Regeneration
As stated above, treatments with ChABC attenuate CSPG inhibition and achieve RGC axon regeneration combined with other interventions in vivo [73] (Table 2). Initially, genetic deletion of PTPσ was found to diminish neuronal sensitivity toward CSPGs and comprehensively enabled regenerative RGC axons to penetrate the glial scar at the lesion sites [120, 130]. Some studies have revealed that optic nerve regeneration in NgR1 and 3 co-deficient mice was further enhanced when PTPσ was deleted [65]. Moreover, a peptide mimic of PTPσ binding to its wedge domain is sufficient to block CSPG-mediated inhibition in vitro, allowing adult neurons to regrow axons after injury [131]. Systemic administration of enoxaparin, a traditional anticoagulant, has been proposed to inactivate PTPσ and boost axon regrowth in rats with optic nerve injury at clinically tolerated doses [132]. Additionally, attenuation of excessive astrogliosis by microRNA (miR)-21 inhibition promotes axon regeneration and functional recovery of the flash visual evoked potentials (F-VEPs) in rats after optic nerve crush [133].
Although intravitreal injection of anti-Sema3A antibodies improves RGC survival after optic nerve transection [137], none of its effects has been reported in axon regeneration. Therefore, researchers have diverted their attention away from antibodies to anti-expression. MiR-30b was found to inhibit Sema3A expression by binding to the 3′ untranslated region of Sema3A mRNA; transfecting cultured RGCs with AAV-miR-30b reduced Sema3A expression levels and significantly promoted the growth of axons while impeding the growth of dendrites [134, 135]. Likewise, Sema3A small interfering RNA and miR-30b overexpression exert similar effects on axon regeneration, collectively representing a new target for the treatment of optic nerve injury [135]. Moreover, inhibition of Sema3A intracellular signaling transduction alleviates the suppressed axon regeneration and completely rescues the decreased amplitude of F-VEPs induced by Sema3A [138].
In addition to CSPGs and Sema3A, studies of TN-C- or TN-R-deficient mice with spinal cord injury showed increased amounts of neural fibers penetrating the glial scar [139]. However, others argue that TN-C is necessary for axon regeneration as more axons retract after injury in TN-C knockout mice, and this retraction could be rescued via viral-mediated overexpression of TN-C [140]. Further studies have observed improved axon regeneration and functional recovery via polyclonal antibodies against TN-R [116]. Additionally, re-expression of TN-C after injury, along with the integrin activator kindlin-1, promotes neurite outgrowth and axon regeneration in the spinal cord [141] and optic nerve [136].
Controversy in Microglia
Microglia are resident immune cells originating from macrophages in the mammalian CNS and play an essential role in both physiological homeostasis maintenance and pathological immune responses [142, 143]. Physiologically, microglial cells constantly monitor the CNS environment and scavenge cellular debris, DNA fragments, and infectious agents [144, 145]. Upon sensing injury, microglia are immediately activated and release cytokines and neurotrophic factors, leading to macrophage infiltration and immune defensive responses [146, 147]. However, whether microglial activation is beneficial or detrimental during CNS repair after damage remains unclear [148]. Microglia can induce neurotoxicity and aggravate the subsequent neurodegeneration after injury, but they can also contribute to the protective mechanisms of tissue repair and regeneration, depending on the characteristics of insults as well as microenvironmental conditions [149]. On the one hand, activated microglia are reported to produce neurotrophic factors and eliminate destructive debris that eventually promotes neuron survival and axon regeneration [150,151,152]. On the other hand, unidentified inhibitory molecules and numerous inflammatory cytokines can impede axon regrowth and damage the intact neurons near the injury site [153,154,155].
According to the macrophage activation process [156], microglia can be generally divided into at least two subclasses with distinct functions depending on the activation pathway. M1 microglia are “classically activated” by lipopolysaccharides or interferon γ (IFN-γ) and then produce large amounts of oxidative metabolites and proinflammatory cytokines, resulting in a defensive immune response, astrogliosis reactivation, and neuronal damage. In contrast, M2 microglia are “alternatively activated” by interleukin-4 (IL-4) and IL-13, and they express IL-10 and arginase-1, collectively downregulating inflammation and promoting tissue repair [142]. An elevated M1/M2 ratio leads to secondary neurodegeneration in mice after spinal cord injury, while a shift in microglial phenotypes from M1 to M2 was observed during the wound healing and axon regeneration processes [157,158,159].
After optic nerve injury, microglia become activated and infiltrate at the lesion site, recruiting macrophages, phagocytosing cellular and axonal debris, and even becoming involved in glial scar formation [160,161,162]. However, the distinct interactions between microglia and RGCs after optic nerve injury remain unclear. We have little idea of the neurotoxic or neuroprotective effects of activated microglia on RGCs in response to damage. Our previous work showed that laquinimod, a newly discovered immunosuppressant, impeded microglia activation and attenuated high intraocular pressure-induced RGC death [163], and that long non-coding RNA-H19 served as a crucial progenitor of microglia pyroptosis and RGC death after ischemia/reperfusion-induced inflammation [164]. It is unknown whether optic nerve regeneration is enhanced or suppressed by cytokines and neurotrophic factors secreted by microglia. The controversial and insufficiently identified characteristics of microglia could be partially attributed to the lack of reliable experimental methods to distinguish microglia from other invading immune cells [165]. Recently, a study reported a novel inhibitor of colony stimulator factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) that could efficiently eliminate more than 99% of microglia without affecting macrophages and other immune cells [166]. Interestingly, after intravitreal injection of this inhibitor, the extent of RGC degeneration after optic nerve injury remained unaffected, and no significant alterations were detected in RGC axon regeneration induced by lens injury. Slight but significant inhibition of optic nerve regeneration was observed when microglia and macrophages were co-depleted [167]. Therefore, a new theory is proposed that, despite their role in macrophage recruitment and phagocytosis, microglia may not be necessary for RGC degeneration and axon regeneration after acute optic nerve injury.
Inflammatory Cells and Neurotrophic Factors
After injury-induced inflammation, macrophages and neutrophils are the primary immune cells that are recruited and accumulate within the lesion site; then, they interact with RGCs via the secretion of various cytokines and neurotrophic factors that manipulate the axon regeneration process. Intraocular inflammation, induced by a lens injury or intravitreal zymosan injection, can delay injury-induced RGC degeneration and promote axon regeneration beyond the optic nerve lesions, profoundly influencing neurological outcomes [6, 168, 169].
Macrophages
Macrophages have been shown to change the non-permissive environment to a pro-regenerative environment at the lesion sites of adult rat optic nerve in vitro [170]. Later, an elevated level of infiltrated macrophages was detected after lens injury or zymosan injection, accompanied by protein accumulation later identified as oncomodulin (Ocm) [171]. Ocm is a calcium-binding protein mainly derived from activated macrophages and neutrophils [8, 172]. After intraocular inflammation, Ocm increases within the retina and binds to RGCs with high affinity in a cAMP-dependent manner, serving as a potent growth factor and stimulating significant axon regrowth in vitro and in vivo [173, 174]. Combinatorial treatment with Ocm and cAMP analogs simulates the pro-regenerative effects of intraocular inflammation, while peptides or antibodies against Ocm almost neutralize the positive effects of zymosan injection on optic nerve regeneration [174]. In addition, Ocm has been used as a guide in a vector complex delivering small interfering RNA of NgR to RGCs because of its high affinity, which dramatically promotes axon regrowth of RGCs [66].
Neutrophils
Neutrophils are reported to be immediately activated and accumulate within lesions after spinal cord injury [175]. Shortly after intraocular zymosan injection, the vast majority of neutrophils infiltrate the eyes before macrophages, and they promote optic nerve regeneration by expressing high levels of Ocm [8]. Immunodepletion of neutrophils reduces the expression of Ocm within the eyes and suppresses inflammation-induced regeneration. Anti-Ocm intervention abolished axon regeneration as effectively as neutrophil depletion. Moreover, macrophages are insufficient to induce axon regeneration in the absence of neutrophils, implying that neutrophils might play a vital and pro-regenerative role in inflammation-induced axon regeneration [8]. Meanwhile, the combined deletion of the pattern recognition receptors dectin-1 and toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) completely abolished the effects of zymosan injection, and further intravitreal injection of the dectin-1 ligand curdlan promotes axon regeneration at the same level as zymosan [176]. Recently, a study has found that administration of Ly6G-specific antibodies successfully depleted neutrophils and significantly compromised the pro-regenerative effects of neurotrophic factors [177]. Another study identified a unique subset of immature neutrophils (CD14 + Ly6Glo) induced by inhibition of C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 2 (CXCR2), which promotes axon regeneration in part via the secretion of various growth factors [178].
Neurotrophic Factors
Ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF) is elevated after injury or zymosan-induced intraocular inflammation [179] and serves as a leading therapeutic candidate to promote neuroprotection and axon regeneration after CNS injury [180, 181]. However, recombinant CNTF (rCNTF) has been shown to have limited effects on axon regeneration [182]. The low efficacy of rCNTF could be attributed to the upregulation of the suppression of cytokine signaling factor 3 (SOCS3), an inhibitor of the JAK/STAT pathway, in mature RGCs [168, 182, 183]. After SOCS3 knockout, rCNTF is capable of enhancing regeneration by activating gp130-dependent kinase signaling [179]. However, another therapeutic method, AAV-mediated CNTF expression, promotes robust optic nerve regeneration by itself, and this pro-regeneration effect involves neuroinflammation, which is mediated primarily by C–C motif chemokine ligand 5 (CCL5) instead of direct action on RGCs [177]. Leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) has also been identified as an additional contributing factor to CNTF, as CNTF and LIF combined knockout completely abolishes the positive effects on RGC survival and axon regeneration [179, 184]. Interestingly, the role of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) post-injury is relatively controversial. After optic nerve injury, BDNF protects RGCs from cell death [185], but also attenuates the level of inflammation-induced axon regeneration [186].
Synaptic Interactions with RGCs
As concluded above, the physiological functions and pathological impacts of glial cells and inflammatory cells after optic nerve injury were thoroughly evaluated. However, we ignored another large number of cells that also have inseparable connections with RGCs, namely interneurons. Due to their neuronal characteristics, the interactions between interneurons and RGCs are predominantly mediated via synapses, which are significantly different from non-neurons. Recently, several studies have concentrated on excavating the role of interneurons and their synaptic impacts on RGC axon regeneration.
Retinal interneurons, consisting of horizontal cells, bipolar cells (BCs), and ACs, play an essential role in the normal retina. In mammalian retinal circuitry, photoreceptors translate light energy into neural signals and convey them to interneurons. Within the outer plexiform layer, horizontal cells contact photoreceptors and mediate feedback and feedforward inhibition of photoreceptors and BCs, respectively [187]. In the inner plexiform layer, BCs form excitatory synapses with at least 40 distinct types of ganglion cells [43, 188], and various ACs regulate these connections through pre-synaptic and post-synaptic inhibition [189, 190]. Given the evidence that only BCs and ACs have direct contact with RGCs, and their vital role in normal retinal circuitry, subsequent studies have mainly focused on the effects of these two types of interneurons after optic nerve injury.
Amacrine Cells
ACs are very diverse predominant inhibitory interneurons in the retina circuit that diminish RGCs’ activity state through inhibitory neurotransmitters, including glycine, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and dopamine [191, 192]. Nearly all ACs form inhibitory synapses with RGCs and could be divided into two subclasses: glycinergic narrow-field type and GABAergic wide-field type [193]. True to their name, instead of axons, ACs output signals to BCs, RGCs, and other ACs via the same dendrites that receive synaptic inputs [187].
The exploration of interneuron-associated axon regeneration inhibition began with ACs. Initially, Goldberg and colleagues found that purified ACs could induce neonatal RGCs to irreversibly transform their growth mode from axonogenesis to dendritogenesis in culture. This inhibition of axon growth occurred only when RGCs and ACs were co-cultured in direct contact. Therefore, they proposed that a contact-mediated or membrane-associated signal plays a role in this inhibition [194, 195]. Although this conclusion merely stopped at the surface of this phenomenon, it provided a hint that this inhibition, unlike that from glial cells, could be involved with synapses since membranes are necessary. After a decade, direct evidence of synaptic interactions has been proposed. Ionic zinc (Zn2+) was reported to accumulate in the AC processes immediately after ONC and keep increasing during the first 24 h, and then transfer into RGCs through synaptic vesicular release, thereby impeding axon regeneration [196]. Recently, optic nerve injury pathologically activates ACs, which later reduces the electrical activity and growth factor responsiveness of RGCs. Genetically silencing ACs or blocking inhibitory neurotransmitters both enhance RGC growth factor signaling, thereby promoting optic nerve regeneration [197].
Bipolar Cells
BCs receive various information, output excitatory signals to a diversity of neuron types in the retina, and, most importantly, connect with photoreceptors, primary sensory neurons, and RGCs, which project their axons out of the eye to the brain [198, 199]. The first operations and analysis of visual systems occur in BCs, which collect photoreceptor signals and accept adjustment from horizontal and ACs for further processing in the inner retina [200].
In a retinal regeneration model of zebrafish, after intravitreal injection of ouabain, a cytotoxin that destroys the inner retina, BCs, and their post-synaptic partner RGCs were shown to survive and regenerate concurrently [201]. Intriguingly, RGCs are generated prior to BCs in the embryonic retina of zebrafish, which is different from the sequence of neurogenesis in regeneration [202]. Furthermore, morphological measurements of BC axons found that the thickness of the inner plexiform layer and number of axon branches were slightly reduced after regeneration, but the synapses on their axons were in excess of the usual number, suggesting a certain impact of BCs on RGC axon regeneration [203, 204]. In an optic nerve injury situation, it has been proposed that BCs are involved in RGC protection and axon regeneration indirectly through interactions with ACs. Excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate released by BCs binds to NMDA and AMPA receptors on the post-synaptic membrane of ACs, leading to the latter neurons’ activation, depolarization, Ca2+ influx, and eventually Zn2+ accumulation [9]. In fact, AC-specific blockage of NMDA receptors suppresses mobile Zn2+ elevation within AC processes after ONC [9]. Nevertheless, the direct effects of BCs on axon regeneration still remain unclear.
Potential Mechanisms of Synaptic Interactions in Optic Nerve Regeneration
After uncovering the inhibitory effects of interneurons after optic nerve injury, we investigated the potential mechanism behind this phenomenon. Herein, we summarize the results of previous related experiments and propose several hypotheses.
Antagonistic Axon-Dendrite Interplay
In adult zebrafish, a vertebrate animal model that is capable of spontaneously regenerating CNS axons, synapse degeneration, and dendrite retraction was immediately observed in RGCs after ONC. Axon regeneration was initiated only when remarkable synapse and dendrite shrinkage occurred [205]. Intriguingly, dendritic regrowth and reconnection occurred after the regenerative axons reinnervated their target neurons in the optic tectum [205].
This obvious time-organized sequence of dendrite remodeling and axon regrowth in zebrafish suggests an antagonistic axon-dendrite interplay after ONC. Hence, several studies have focused on whether the inhibition of dendrite shrinkage promotes axon regeneration. Inhibition of mTOR via intravitreal injection of rapamycin successfully preserved synapses and dendrites early after ONC, which subsequently restrained axon regeneration and reinnervation [206]. However, if the administration of rapamycin was delayed until the synapses and dendrites had already deteriorated, no signs of negative impact on axon regeneration were observed [206]. Together, these data could indicate an underlying antagonistic interplay between axon regrowth and dendrite remodeling and that dendrite shrinkage is favorable for axon regeneration during CNS repair.
In this context, it is reasonable that dendrite shrinkage after axon injury is the necessary preparation for axon regrowth in mammals, despite their failure of regeneration due to the lack of intrinsic potentials and strong inhibitory environments. Some evidence supports this opinion. As mentioned above, the contact-mediated or membrane-associated signals from ACs irreversibly switch neonatal RGCs from an axon growth mode to a dendrite growth mode [194]. Intravitreal injection of rCNTF combined with cAMP analogs or Rho-GTPase inhibitor (BA-210) has been shown to increase RGC survival and axon regeneration [207, 208]. However, this pro-regenerative outcome is accompanied by aberrant dendrite morphologies, including excessive looping processes and shrinking but sparser dendritic fields [209]. Similarly, dendrites have been proposed to repress axon regeneration through a dual leucine zipper kinase (DLK)-independent pathway, as cutting dendrites in the DLK knockout background relieve the anti-growth signal and result in axon regeneration [210]. Apart from RGCs, axon regeneration of light and pheromone-sensing neurons (ASJ) in Caenorhabditis elegans is enhanced when axotomy is performed simultaneously with dendritomy compared to axon transection alone [211].
Overall, the retraction of RGC dendrites from their synaptic connections with interneurons has been proven to benefit axon regeneration and nerve repair. Nevertheless, more research is clearly needed to provide solid evidence for the observed antagonistic axon-dendrite interplay and the role of synaptic inhibition during optic nerve regeneration.
Inhibitory Neurotransmitters
The diversity of neurotransmitters that carry information between neurons within their synaptic clefts provides the nervous system with remarkable complexity and functionality [212, 213]. In the retina circuitry, glycine, GABA-A, and dopamine receptors are distributed on RGC dendrites and receive inhibitory input from ACs [214, 215], whereas glycine and GABA-C receptors are distributed on BC axon terminals that also mediate inhibitory signals from ACs [216, 217]. Hence, it is plausible that these inhibitory neurotransmitters and their receptors are critical therapeutic targets after optic nerve injury.
A massive amount of aminoacidergic neurotransmitters (mostly glycine, GABA, and glutamate) has been observed after spinal cord injury [218, 219]. Excessive accumulation of glutamate and glycine results in excitotoxicity and neuronal loss [220,221,222]. In contrast, GABA has been reported to promote survival and regeneration of descending neurons after spinal cord injury in larval lampreys [223]. Unfortunately, few studies have demonstrated the pro-regenerative effects of these neurotransmitters in mammals, and none of these results has been verified in optic nerve injury models. Nevertheless, some studies have indirectly hinted at the influence of inhibitory neurotransmitters on optic nerve regeneration. After ONC, a drug cocktail consisting of antagonist blockers of inhibitory neurotransmitter receptors was immediately injected into the vitreous body of mice. The responsiveness of RGCs to growth factors was enhanced, and axon regeneration level was significantly increased when antagonist cocktail treatment was combined with insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) [197]. Intriguingly, the recovery of signaling competence toward IGF-1 was caused by the maintenance of IGF-1 receptors in RGC primary cilia, which would have been lost upon optic nerve injury [197].
In another view, the level of RGC physiological activity depends on the excitatory or inhibitory neurotransmitters from pre-synaptic interneurons, which also alters the growth state of RGCs. Thus, different experiments were conducted to explore the role of neuronal activity in axon regeneration. In cultured immature RGCs, BDNF-induced axon outgrowth was remarkably potentiated by spontaneously generated electrical activity at physiological levels [224]. After ONC, RGC axon regeneration is enhanced by elevated levels of electrical activity induced by light stimulation through GPCR signaling [225] or by transcorneal electrical stimulation [226, 227]. Recent findings indicate that increasing mouse RGC activity by visual stimulations or chemogenetics combined with mTOR activation could serve as a potent tool for improving axon regeneration, even with partial recovery of visual functions and vision-guided behaviors, including the optomotor response, pupillary response, depth perception, and circadian entrainment [228, 229]. Upon activation and depolarization of RGCs, Ca2+ influx then initiates active-dependent transcription and elevates the level of cAMP, which in turn promotes the expression of growth-related genes, bridging the gap between neuronal activity and pro-regenerative function [230, 231].
All these facts taken together, we still need to uncover the precise role of each kind of neurotransmitter, either protective or neurotoxic, in the optic nerve injury situation. Further, more in-depth studies are required to determine the specific receptors that neurotransmitters bind and how intracellular post-synaptic signaling downstream is mediated.
Other Synaptic Vesicular Contents
In addition to neurotransmitters, other vesicular contents transported within synaptic clefts may contribute significantly to the synaptic interactions between interneurons and RGCs post-injury. As stated above, Zn2+ was reported to increase in ACs immediately after ONC and then transfer into RGCs through synaptic vesicular release. Zn2+ transporter 3 (ZnT-3) knockout in slc30a3-deficient mice significantly attenuated Zn2+ accumulation in the AC vesicles and eventually promoted axon regeneration. Intravitreal administration of Zn2+ chelators also promoted axon regeneration and even enhanced the pro-regenerative effects of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and Krüpple-like factor (KLF)-9 knockout [196, 232].
AC-specific nitric oxide (NO) production could be the vital progenitor of mobile Zn2+ accumulation within ACs after optic nerve injury. Upon RGC axon injury, ACs are initially hyperactivated followed by Ca2+ influx [197], which in turn initiates NO generation through activating the NO synthetase [233,234,235]. Reactive nitrogen species are then produced and induce intracellular oxidative stress, thereby leading to the liberation of Zn2+ from metallothioneins and elevation of mobile Zn2+ in ACs [236, 237].
Current Puzzles and Future Directions of Synaptic Interactions
As stated above, the majority of the experimental outcomes supporting the hypotheses were from retinal regeneration models of non-mammals, which have not been proven in mammals with optic nerve injury. That is to say, more studies are needed to provide more solid theories of the mechanisms behind synaptic interaction after optic nerve injury. Moreover, it seems feasible and promising to draw lessons from other CNS pathways. Some research has shown that the transected axons from mammalian spinal interneurons could spontaneously regenerate [238]; therefore, elucidating the underlying mechanisms that allow these axons to regrow might enlighten us on some new hypotheses. Additionally, we still could not fully understand how ACs are instantly hyperactivated after the axons of RGCs are injured. A theory is proposed that Cl− gradient dysregulation in the interneurons after optic nerve injury leads to positive feedback circuits between BCs and ACs, which in turn results in early hyperactivation of ACs [9, 239]. Apart from ACs, little is known about the role of BCs in axon regeneration. How do they respond to optic nerve injury? How do they interact with RGCs under traumatic circumstances? More answers are needed to the above-mentioned and subsequent questions.
Conclusion
To date, we have already identified abundant extracellular molecules, such as Nogo, MAG, OMgp, CSPGs, semaphorins, tenascins, and many neurotrophic factors; they all bind to specific receptors on RGCs, the process that is classified as “non-synaptic interactions.” Various interventions targeting these ligands or their receptors have been shown to promote axon regeneration over past decades. Meanwhile, we intend to focus more on the role of “synaptic interactions” in optic nerve regeneration. Interfering with the synaptic connections between ACs and RGCs has been shown to be a powerful strategy to enhance axon regenerative ability. We have already proposed several theories that may elucidate this process to a certain extent. The exploration of different intercellular interactions with RGCs after optic nerve injury could help us better understand the initial and subsequent responses in the complex retinal circuit and lead to new therapeutic strategies for axon regeneration.
Prospects
Remarkable progress in RGC axon regeneration has been achieved over the past two decades, and the optic nerve is now considered one of the principal models for axon regeneration investigation in the CNS. However, compared with the rapid progress achieved in basic research, few clinical treatments have been proved to markedly rescue certain forms of blindness in patients. A great deal of obstacles remains to be overcome to achieve clinically meaningful visual recovery.
One of the greatest challenges is the lack of long-distance axon regeneration since functional visual recovery is based on an adequate amount of RGC axons regenerating across the optic chiasm and reinnervating specific targets in the brain [240]. In this regard, more research should focus on axon guidance signals that are capable of navigating axon growth during development or after injury (e.g., ephrins, netrins, and semaphorins) [84, 241,242,243]. In addition, combined treatments have always been found to promote a more substantial regeneration effect than individual treatments [240]. The next challenge is to extend the therapeutic window in clinical practice by increasing RGC survival rate while promoting axon regeneration. Axon regeneration apparently requires intact RGC soma with full function, especially in the case of glaucoma, when RGC degeneration and irreversible loss are key factors in the pathological process. Preliminary studies have uncovered various methods to protect RGCs from neuron death in rodent models of acute and chronic glaucoma [244,245,246]. Furthermore, it is of great necessity to find optimized animal models that could better bridge the gap of clinical translation. Currently, the rodent ONC model is one of the most widely used animal models for RGC survival and axon regeneration research. However, this surgically easy and highly reproducible animal model cannot fully imitate complicated clinical conditions related to optic nerve injury. Nonhuman primate models could be the solution to this problem. A growing number of researchers have been dedicated to uncovering the molecular and cellular processes that underline nonhuman primates in various retina and optic nerve diseases through recently developed multi-omics approaches [247,248,249].
Collectively, the field of optic nerve regeneration and vision recovery is not only challenging but also full of hope. Transplantation of RGCs is starting to emerge as a realistic approach to reverse certain forms of blindness. Researchers attempt to replace damaged RGCs after optic nerve injury with neonatal ones differentiated from embryonic stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells, and promising progress has been achieved [250,251,252,253,254,255,256]. Even the theory of RGC transplantation from deceased donors into recipients’ eyes has been supported in rats with successful integration and axon projection after allogeneic RGC transplantation [257]. Promisingly, both basic and translational studies possess great potential to achieve long-distance axon regeneration and full recovery of visual function for some time to come.
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
References
Dhande OS, Stafford BK, Lim JA, Huberman AD (2015) Contributions of Retinal Ganglion Cells to Subcortical Visual Processing and Behaviors. Annu Rev Vis Sci 1:291–328. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-vision-082114-035502
Moore DL, Goldberg JL (2010) Four steps to optic nerve regeneration. J Neuroophthalmol 30(4):347–360. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNO.0b013e3181e755af
Laha B, Stafford BK, Huberman AD (2017) Regenerating optic pathways from the eye to the brain. Science 356(6342):1031–1034. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal5060
Benowitz LI, He Z, Goldberg JL (2017) Reaching the brain: Advances in optic nerve regeneration. Exp Neurol 287(Pt 3):365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2015.12.015
Fischer D, Leibinger M (2012) Promoting optic nerve regeneration. Prog Retin Eye Res 31(6):688–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2012.06.005
Popovich PG, Longbrake EE (2008) Can the immune system be harnessed to repair the CNS? Nat Rev Neurosci 9(6):481–493. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2398
Yiu G, He Z (2006) Glial inhibition of CNS axon regeneration. Nat Rev Neurosci 7(8):617–627. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1956
Kurimoto T, Yin Y, Habboub G, Gilbert HY, Li Y, Nakao S, Hafezi-Moghadam A, Benowitz LI (2013) Neutrophils express oncomodulin and promote optic nerve regeneration. J Neurosci 33(37):14816–14824. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.5511-12.2013
Sergeeva EG, Rosenberg PA, Benowitz LI (2021) Non-Cell-Autonomous Regulation of Optic Nerve Regeneration by Amacrine Cells. Front Cell Neurosci 15:666798. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2021.666798
Lee Y, Morrison BM, Li Y, Lengacher S, Farah MH, Hoffman PN, Liu Y, Tsingalia A et al (2012) Oligodendroglia metabolically support axons and contribute to neurodegeneration. Nature 487(7408):443–448. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11314
Geoffroy CG, Zheng B (2014) Myelin-associated inhibitors in axonal growth after CNS injury. Curr Opin Neurobiol 27:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2014.02.012
Berry M, Ahmed Z, Lorber B, Douglas M, Logan A (2008) Regeneration of axons in the visual system. Restor Neurol Neurosci 26(2–3):147–174
Prinjha R, Moore SE, Vinson M, Blake S, Morrow R, Christie G, Michalovich D, Simmons DL et al (2000) Inhibitor of neurite outgrowth in humans. Nature 403(6768):383–384. https://doi.org/10.1038/35000287
Tessier-Lavigne M, Goodman CS (2000) Perspectives: neurobiology. Regeneration in the Nogo zone. Science 287(5454):813–814. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5454.813
Chen MS, Huber AB, van der Haar ME, Frank M, Schnell L, Spillmann AA, Christ F, Schwab ME (2000) Nogo-A is a myelin-associated neurite outgrowth inhibitor and an antigen for monoclonal antibody IN-1. Nature 403(6768):434–439. https://doi.org/10.1038/35000219
Caroni P, Schwab ME (1988) Two membrane protein fractions from rat central myelin with inhibitory properties for neurite growth and fibroblast spreading. J Cell Biol 106(4):1281–1288. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.106.4.1281
GrandPré T, Nakamura F, Vartanian T, Strittmatter SM (2000) Identification of the Nogo inhibitor of axon regeneration as a Reticulon protein. Nature 403(6768):439–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/35000226
Schwab ME (2004) Nogo and axon regeneration. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14(1):118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2004.01.004
Huber AB, Weinmann O, Brösamle C, Oertle T, Schwab ME (2002) Patterns of Nogo mRNA and protein expression in the developing and adult rat and after CNS lesions. J Neurosci 22(9):3553–3567. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.22-09-03553.2002
Fournier AE, GrandPre T, Strittmatter SM (2001) Identification of a receptor mediating Nogo-66 inhibition of axonal regeneration. Nature 409(6818):341–346. https://doi.org/10.1038/35053072
GrandPré T, Li S, Strittmatter SM (2002) Nogo-66 receptor antagonist peptide promotes axonal regeneration. Nature 417(6888):547–551. https://doi.org/10.1038/417547a
Oertle T, van der Haar ME, Bandtlow CE, Robeva A, Burfeind P, Buss A, Huber AB, Simonen M et al (2003) Nogo-A inhibits neurite outgrowth and cell spreading with three discrete regions. J Neurosci 23(13):5393–5406. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.23-13-05393.2003
McKerracher L, David S, Jackson DL, Kottis V, Dunn RJ, Braun PE (1994) Identification of myelin-associated glycoprotein as a major myelin-derived inhibitor of neurite growth. Neuron 13(4):805–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(94)90247-x
Mukhopadhyay G, Doherty P, Walsh FS, Crocker PR, Filbin MT (1994) A novel role for myelin-associated glycoprotein as an inhibitor of axonal regeneration. Neuron 13(3):757–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(94)90042-6
Filbin MT (1995) Myelin-associated glycoprotein: a role in myelination and in the inhibition of axonal regeneration? Curr Opin Neurobiol 5(5):588–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4388(95)80063-8
Trapp BD (1990) Myelin-associated glycoprotein. Location and potential functions. Ann N Y Acad Sci 605:29–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1990.tb42378.x
Trapp BD, Andrews SB, Cootauco C, Quarles R (1989) The myelin-associated glycoprotein is enriched in multivesicular bodies and periaxonal membranes of actively myelinating oligodendrocytes. J Cell Biol 109(5):2417–2426. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.109.5.2417
Johnson PW, Abramow-Newerly W, Seilheimer B, Sadoul R, Tropak MB, Arquint M, Dunn RJ, Schachner M et al (1989) Recombinant myelin-associated glycoprotein confers neural adhesion and neurite outgrowth function. Neuron 3(3):377–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(89)90262-6
Shibata A, Wright MV, David S, McKerracher L, Braun PE, Kater SB (1998) Unique responses of differentiating neuronal growth cones to inhibitory cues presented by oligodendrocytes. J Cell Biol 142(1):191–202. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.142.1.191
Bartsch U, Bandtlow CE, Schnell L, Bartsch S, Spillmann AA, Rubin BP, Hillenbrand R, Montag D et al (1995) Lack of evidence that myelin-associated glycoprotein is a major inhibitor of axonal regeneration in the CNS. Neuron 15(6):1375–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(95)90015-2
Habib AA, Marton LS, Allwardt B, Gulcher JR, Mikol DD, Högnason T, Chattopadhyay N, Stefansson K (1998) Expression of the oligodendrocyte-myelin glycoprotein by neurons in the mouse central nervous system. J Neurochem 70(4):1704–1711. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-4159.1998.70041704.x
Mikol DD, Stefansson K (1988) A phosphatidylinositol-linked peanut agglutinin-binding glycoprotein in central nervous system myelin and on oligodendrocytes. J Cell Biol 106(4):1273–1279. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.106.4.1273
Wang KC, Koprivica V, Kim JA, Sivasankaran R, Guo Y, Neve RL, He Z (2002) Oligodendrocyte-myelin glycoprotein is a Nogo receptor ligand that inhibits neurite outgrowth. Nature 417(6892):941–944. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature00867
Vourc’h P, Andres C (2004) Oligodendrocyte myelin glycoprotein (OMgp): evolution, structure and function. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 45(2):115–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2004.01.003
Huang JK, Phillips GR, Roth AD, Pedraza L, Shan W, Belkaid W, Mi S, Fex-Svenningsen A et al (2005) Glial membranes at the node of Ranvier prevent neurite outgrowth. Science 310(5755):1813–1817. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1118313
Kottis V, Thibault P, Mikol D, Xiao ZC, Zhang R, Dergham P, Braun PE (2002) Oligodendrocyte-myelin glycoprotein (OMgp) is an inhibitor of neurite outgrowth. J Neurochem 82(6):1566–1569. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-4159.2002.01146.x
Laurén J, Airaksinen MS, Saarma M, Timmusk T (2003) Two novel mammalian Nogo receptor homologs differentially expressed in the central and peripheral nervous systems. Mol Cell Neurosci 24(3):581–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1044-7431(03)00199-4
Pignot V, Hein AE, Barske C, Wiessner C, Walmsley AR, Kaupmann K, Mayeur H, Sommer B et al (2003) Characterization of two novel proteins, NgRH1 and NgRH2, structurally and biochemically homologous to the Nogo-66 receptor. J Neurochem 85(3):717–728. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-4159.2003.01710.x
Domeniconi M, Cao Z, Spencer T, Sivasankaran R, Wang K, Nikulina E, Kimura N, Cai H et al (2002) Myelin-associated glycoprotein interacts with the Nogo66 receptor to inhibit neurite outgrowth. Neuron 35(2):283–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00770-5
Liu BP, Fournier A, GrandPré T, Strittmatter SM (2002) Myelin-associated glycoprotein as a functional ligand for the Nogo-66 receptor. Science 297(5584):1190–1193. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1073031
He XL, Bazan JF, McDermott G, Park JB, Wang K, Tessier-Lavigne M, He Z, Garcia KC (2003) Structure of the Nogo receptor ectodomain: a recognition module implicated in myelin inhibition. Neuron 38(2):177–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(03)00232-0
Solomon AM, Westbrook T, Field GD, McGee AW (2018) Nogo receptor 1 is expressed by nearly all retinal ganglion cells. PLoS One 13(5):e0196565. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196565
Tran NM, Shekhar K, Whitney IE, Jacobi A, Benhar I, Hong G, Yan W, Adiconis X et al (2019) Single-Cell Profiles of Retinal Ganglion Cells Differing in Resilience to Injury Reveal Neuroprotective Genes. Neuron 104(6):1039-1055.e1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2019.11.006
Mi S, Lee X, Shao Z, Thill G, Ji B, Relton J, Levesque M, Allaire N et al (2004) LINGO-1 is a component of the Nogo-66 receptor/p75 signaling complex. Nat Neurosci 7(3):221–228. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1188
Wang KC, Kim JA, Sivasankaran R, Segal R, He Z (2002) P75 interacts with the Nogo receptor as a co-receptor for Nogo MAG and OMgp. Nature 420(6911):74–78. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01176
Wong ST, Henley JR, Kanning KC, Huang KH, Bothwell M, Poo MM (2002) A p75(NTR) and Nogo receptor complex mediates repulsive signaling by myelin-associated glycoprotein. Nat Neurosci 5(12):1302–1308. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn975
Yamashita T, Higuchi H, Tohyama M (2002) The p75 receptor transduces the signal from myelin-associated glycoprotein to Rho. J Cell Biol 157(4):565–570. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200202010
Park JB, Yiu G, Kaneko S, Wang J, Chang J, He XL, Garcia KC, He Z (2005) A TNF receptor family member, TROY, is a coreceptor with Nogo receptor in mediating the inhibitory activity of myelin inhibitors. Neuron 45(3):345–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.040
Venkatesh K, Chivatakarn O, Lee H, Joshi PS, Kantor DB, Newman BA, Mage R, Rader C et al (2005) The Nogo-66 receptor homolog NgR2 is a sialic acid-dependent receptor selective for myelin-associated glycoprotein. J Neurosci 25(4):808–822. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4464-04.2005
Zhang L, Kuang X, Zhang J (2011) Nogo receptor 3, a paralog of Nogo-66 receptor 1 (NgR1), may function as a NgR1 co-receptor for Nogo-66. J Genet Genomics 38(11):515–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgg.2011.10.001
Atwal JK, Pinkston-Gosse J, Syken J, Stawicki S, Wu Y, Shatz C, Tessier-Lavigne M (2008) PirB is a functional receptor for myelin inhibitors of axonal regeneration. Science 322(5903):967–970. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161151
Filbin MT (2008) PirB, a second receptor for the myelin inhibitors of axonal regeneration Nogo66, MAG, and OMgp: implications for regeneration in vivo. Neuron 60(5):740–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2008.12.001
Cai X, Yuan R, Hu Z, Chen C, Yu J, Zheng Z, Ye J (2012) Expression of PirB protein in intact and injured optic nerve and retina of mice. Neurochem Res 37(3):647–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11064-011-0656-2
Su Y, Wang F, Zhao SG, Pan SH, Liu P, Teng Y, Cui H (2008) Axonal regeneration after optic nerve crush in Nogo-A/B/C knockout mice. Mol Vis 14:268–273
Lee JK, Geoffroy CG, Chan AF, Tolentino KE, Crawford MJ, Leal MA, Kang B, Zheng B (2010) Assessing spinal axon regeneration and sprouting in Nogo-, MAG-, and OMgp-deficient mice. Neuron 66(5):663–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.05.002
Cafferty WB, Duffy P, Huebner E, Strittmatter SM (2010) MAG and OMgp synergize with Nogo-A to restrict axonal growth and neurological recovery after spinal cord trauma. J Neurosci 30(20):6825–6837. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.6239-09.2010
Pernet V, Joly S, Dalkara D, Schwarz O, Christ F, Schaffer D, Flannery JG, Schwab ME (2012) Neuronal Nogo-A upregulation does not contribute to ER stress-associated apoptosis but participates in the regenerative response in the axotomized adult retina. Cell Death Differ 19(7):1096–1108. https://doi.org/10.1038/cdd.2011.191
Vajda F, Jordi N, Dalkara D, Joly S, Christ F, Tews B, Schwab ME, Pernet V (2015) Cell type-specific Nogo-A gene ablation promotes axonal regeneration in the injured adult optic nerve. Cell Death Differ 22(2):323–335. https://doi.org/10.1038/cdd.2014.147
Liebscher T, Schnell L, Schnell D, Scholl J, Schneider R, Gullo M, Fouad K, Mir A et al (2005) Nogo-A antibody improves regeneration and locomotion of spinal cord-injured rats. Ann Neurol 58(5):706–719. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.20627
Merkler D, Metz GA, Raineteau O, Dietz V, Schwab ME, Fouad K (2001) Locomotor recovery in spinal cord-injured rats treated with an antibody neutralizing the myelin-associated neurite growth inhibitor Nogo-A. J Neurosci 21(10):3665–3673. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.21-10-03665.2001
Cui Q, Cho KS, So KF, Yip HK (2004) Synergistic effect of Nogo-neutralizing antibody IN-1 and ciliary neurotrophic factor on axonal regeneration in adult rodent visual systems. J Neurotrauma 21(5):617–625. https://doi.org/10.1089/089771504774129946
Tang S, Qiu J, Nikulina E, Filbin MT (2001) Soluble myelin-associated glycoprotein released from damaged white matter inhibits axonal regeneration. Mol Cell Neurosci 18(3):259–269. https://doi.org/10.1006/mcne.2001.1020
Tang S, Woodhall RW, Shen YJ, deBellard ME, Saffell JL, Doherty P, Walsh FS, Filbin MT (1997) Soluble myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG) found in vivo inhibits axonal regeneration. Mol Cell Neurosci 9(5–6):333–346. https://doi.org/10.1006/mcne.1997.0633
Fischer D, He Z, Benowitz LI (2004) Counteracting the Nogo receptor enhances optic nerve regeneration if retinal ganglion cells are in an active growth state. J Neurosci 24(7):1646–1651. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.5119-03.2004
Dickendesher TL, Baldwin KT, Mironova YA, Koriyama Y, Raiker SJ, Askew KL, Wood A, Geoffroy CG et al (2012) NgR1 and NgR3 are receptors for chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans. Nat Neurosci 15(5):703–712. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3070
Cui Z, Kang J, Hu D, Zhou J, Wang Y (2014) Oncomodulin/truncated protamine-mediated Nogo-66 receptor small interference RNA delivery promotes axon regeneration in retinal ganglion cells. Mol Cells 37(8):613–619. https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2014.0155
Hirokawa T, Zou Y, Kurihara Y, Jiang Z, Sakakibara Y, Ito H, Funakoshi K, Kawahara N et al (2017) Regulation of axonal regeneration by the level of function of the endogenous Nogo receptor antagonist LOTUS. Sci Rep 7(1):12119. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12449-6
Kawakami Y, Kurihara Y, Saito Y, Fujita Y, Yamashita T, Takei K (2018) The Soluble Form of LOTUS inhibits Nogo Receptor-Mediated Signaling by Interfering with the Interaction Between Nogo Receptor Type 1 and p75 Neurotrophin Receptor. J Neurosci 38(10):2589–2604. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0953-17.2018
Su Y, Yu Z, Guo X, Wang F, Chen F (2017) Axonal regeneration of optic nerve after crush after PirBsiRNA transfection. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 10(9):9633–9638
Huo Y, Yin XL, Ji SX, Zou H, Lang M, Zheng Z, Cai XF, Liu W et al (2013) Inhibition of retinal ganglion cell axonal outgrowth through the Amino-Nogo-A signaling pathway. Neurochem Res 38(7):1365–1374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11064-013-1032-1
Wang X, Lin J, Arzeno A, Choi JY, Boccio J, Frieden E, Bhargava A, Maynard G et al (2015) Intravitreal delivery of human NgR-Fc decoy protein regenerates axons after optic nerve crush and protects ganglion cells in glaucoma models. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56(2):1357–1366. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.14-15472
Zheng B, Atwal J, Ho C, Case L, He XL, Garcia KC, Steward O, Tessier-Lavigne M (2005) Genetic deletion of the Nogo receptor does not reduce neurite inhibition in vitro or promote corticospinal tract regeneration in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(4):1205–1210. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0409026102
Wang X, Hasan O, Arzeno A, Benowitz LI, Cafferty WB, Strittmatter SM (2012) Axonal regeneration induced by blockade of glial inhibitors coupled with activation of intrinsic neuronal growth pathways. Exp Neurol 237(1):55–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2012.06.009
Kurihara Y, Iketani M, Ito H, Nishiyama K, Sakakibara Y, Goshima Y, Takei K (2014) LOTUS suppresses axon growth inhibition by blocking interaction between Nogo receptor-1 and all four types of its ligand. Mol Cell Neurosci 61:211–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcn.2014.07.001
Kurihara Y, Takai T, Takei K (2020) Nogo receptor antagonist LOTUS exerts suppression on axonal growth-inhibiting receptor PIR-B. J Neurochem 155(3):285–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.15013
Moreau-Fauvarque C, Kumanogoh A, Camand E, Jaillard C, Barbin G, Boquet I, Love C, Jones EY et al (2003) The transmembrane semaphorin Sema4D/CD100, an inhibitor of axonal growth, is expressed on oligodendrocytes and upregulated after CNS lesion. J Neurosci 23(27):9229–9239. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.23-27-09229.2003
Ito Y, Oinuma I, Katoh H, Kaibuchi K, Negishi M (2006) Sema4D/plexin-B1 activates GSK-3beta through R-Ras GAP activity, inducing growth cone collapse. EMBO Rep 7(7):704–709. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400737
Kantor DB, Chivatakarn O, Peer KL, Oster SF, Inatani M, Hansen MJ, Flanagan JG, Yamaguchi Y et al (2004) Semaphorin 5A is a bifunctional axon guidance cue regulated by heparan and chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans. Neuron 44(6):961–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.002
Goldberg JL, Vargas ME, Wang JT, Mandemakers W, Oster SF, Sretavan DW, Barres BA (2004) An oligodendrocyte lineage-specific semaphorin, Sema5A, inhibits axon growth by retinal ganglion cells. J Neurosci 24(21):4989–4999. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4390-03.2004
Oster SF, Bodeker MO, He F, Sretavan DW (2003) Invariant Sema5A inhibition serves an ensheathing function during optic nerve development. Development 130(4):775–784. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.00299
Benson MD, Romero MI, Lush ME, Lu QR, Henkemeyer M, Parada LF (2005) Ephrin-B3 is a myelin-based inhibitor of neurite outgrowth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(30):10694–10699. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0504021102
Duffy P, Wang X, Siegel CS, Tu N, Henkemeyer M, Cafferty WB, Strittmatter SM (2012) Myelin-derived ephrinB3 restricts axonal regeneration and recovery after adult CNS injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(13):5063–5068. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1113953109
Rajasekharan S, Kennedy TE (2009) The netrin protein family. Genome Biol 10(9):239. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2009-10-9-239
Ellezam B, Selles-Navarro I, Manitt C, Kennedy TE, McKerracher L (2001) Expression of netrin-1 and its receptors DCC and UNC-5H2 after axotomy and during regeneration of adult rat retinal ganglion cells. Exp Neurol 168(1):105–115. https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.2000.7589
Löw K, Culbertson M, Bradke F, Tessier-Lavigne M, Tuszynski MH (2008) Netrin-1 is a novel myelin-associated inhibitor to axon growth. J Neurosci 28(5):1099–1108. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4906-07.2008
Karimi-Abdolrezaee S, Billakanti R (2012) Reactive astrogliosis after spinal cord injury-beneficial and detrimental effects. Mol Neurobiol 46(2):251–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-012-8287-4
Sofroniew MV (2009) Molecular dissection of reactive astrogliosis and glial scar formation. Trends Neurosci 32(12):638–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2009.08.002
McGraw J, Hiebert GW, Steeves JD (2001) Modulating astrogliosis after neurotrauma. J Neurosci Res 63(2):109–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4547(20010115)63:2%3c109::Aid-jnr1002%3e3.0.Co;2-j
Busch SA, Silver J (2007) The role of extracellular matrix in CNS regeneration. Curr Opin Neurobiol 17(1):120–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2006.09.004
Fawcett JW (2006) Overcoming inhibition in the damaged spinal cord. J Neurotrauma 23(3–4):371–383. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2006.23.371
Fitch MT, Silver J (1997) Activated macrophages and the blood-brain barrier: inflammation after CNS injury leads to increases in putative inhibitory molecules. Exp Neurol 148(2):587–603. https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.1997.6701
Zhang H, Uchimura K, Kadomatsu K (2006) Brain keratan sulfate and glial scar formation. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1086:81–90. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1377.014
Zuchero JB, Barres BA (2015) Glia in mammalian development and disease. Development 142(22):3805–3809. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.129304
Fitch MT, Silver J (2008) CNS injury, glial scars, and inflammation: Inhibitory extracellular matrices and regeneration failure. Exp Neurol 209(2):294–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2007.05.014
Silver J, Miller JH (2004) Regeneration beyond the glial scar. Nat Rev Neurosci 5(2):146–156. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1326
Properzi F, Asher RA, Fawcett JW (2003) Chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans in the central nervous system: changes and synthesis after injury. Biochem Soc Trans 31(2):335–336. https://doi.org/10.1042/bst0310335
McKeon RJ, Höke A, Silver J (1995) Injury-induced proteoglycans inhibit the potential for laminin-mediated axon growth on astrocytic scars. Exp Neurol 136(1):32–43. https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.1995.1081
Rhodes KE, Fawcett JW (2004) Chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans: preventing plasticity or protecting the CNS? J Anat 204(1):33–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7580.2004.00261.x
Galtrey CM, Fawcett JW (2007) The role of chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans in regeneration and plasticity in the central nervous system. Brain Res Rev 54(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2006.09.006
Carulli D, Rhodes KE, Brown DJ, Bonnert TP, Pollack SJ, Oliver K, Strata P, Fawcett JW (2006) Composition of perineuronal nets in the adult rat cerebellum and the cellular origin of their components. J Comp Neurol 494(4):559–577. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.20822
McKeon RJ, Schreiber RC, Rudge JS, Silver J (1991) Reduction of neurite outgrowth in a model of glial scarring following CNS injury is correlated with the expression of inhibitory molecules on reactive astrocytes. J Neurosci 11(11):3398–3411. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.11-11-03398.1991
Morgenstern DA, Asher RA, Fawcett JW (2002) Chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans in the CNS injury response. Prog Brain Res 137:313–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-6123(02)37024-9
Bradbury EJ, Moon LD, Popat RJ, King VR, Bennett GS, Patel PN, Fawcett JW, McMahon SB (2002) Chondroitinase ABC promotes functional recovery after spinal cord injury. Nature 416(6881):636–640. https://doi.org/10.1038/416636a
Pasterkamp RJ (2012) Getting neural circuits into shape with semaphorins. Nat Rev Neurosci 13(9):605–618. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3302
Pasterkamp RJ, Verhaagen J (2001) Emerging roles for semaphorins in neural regeneration. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 35(1):36–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-0173(00)00050-3
Pasterkamp RJ, Giger RJ, Ruitenberg MJ, Holtmaat AJ, De Wit J, De Winter F, Verhaagen J (1999) Expression of the gene encoding the chemorepellent semaphorin III is induced in the fibroblast component of neural scar tissue formed following injuries of adult but not neonatal CNS. Mol Cell Neurosci 13(2):143–166. https://doi.org/10.1006/mcne.1999.0738
De Winter F, Oudega M, Lankhorst AJ, Hamers FP, Blits B, Ruitenberg MJ, Pasterkamp RJ, Gispen WH et al (2002) Injury-induced class 3 semaphorin expression in the rat spinal cord. Exp Neurol 175(1):61–75. https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.2002.7884
Wanigasekara Y, Keast JR (2006) Nerve growth factor, glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor and neurturin prevent semaphorin 3A-mediated growth cone collapse in adult sensory neurons. Neuroscience 142(2):369–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.06.031
Kaneko S, Iwanami A, Nakamura M, Kishino A, Kikuchi K, Shibata S, Okano HJ, Ikegami T et al (2006) A selective Sema3A inhibitor enhances regenerative responses and functional recovery of the injured spinal cord. Nat Med 12(12):1380–1389. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm1505
Chiquet-Ehrismann R, Tucker RP (2011) Tenascins and the importance of adhesion modulation. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3 (5). https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a004960
Adams JC, Chiquet-Ehrismann R, Tucker RP (2015) The evolution of tenascins and fibronectin. Cell Adh Migr 9(1–2):22–33. https://doi.org/10.4161/19336918.2014.970030
Ajemian A, Ness R, David S (1994) Tenascin in the injured rat optic nerve and in non-neuronal cells in vitro: potential role in neural repair. J Comp Neurol 340(2):233–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.903400208
Laywell ED, Dörries U, Bartsch U, Faissner A, Schachner M, Steindler DA (1992) Enhanced expression of the developmentally regulated extracellular matrix molecule tenascin following adult brain injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89(7):2634–2638. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.89.7.2634
Zhang Y, Winterbottom JK, Schachner M, Lieberman AR, Anderson PN (1997) Tenascin-C expression and axonal sprouting following injury to the spinal dorsal columns in the adult rat. J Neurosci Res 49(4):433–450
Battisti WP, Wang J, Bozek K, Murray M (1995) Macrophages, microglia, and astrocytes are rapidly activated after crush injury of the goldfish optic nerve: a light and electron microscopic analysis. J Comp Neurol 354(2):306–320. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.903540211
Apostolova I, Irintchev A, Schachner M (2006) Tenascin-R restricts posttraumatic remodeling of motoneuron innervation and functional recovery after spinal cord injury in adult mice. J Neurosci 26(30):7849–7859. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1526-06.2006
Becker T, Anliker B, Becker CG, Taylor J, Schachner M, Meyer RL, Bartsch U (2000) Tenascin-R inhibits regrowth of optic fibers in vitro and persists in the optic nerve of mice after injury. Glia 29(4):330–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-1136(20000215)29:4%3c330::aid-glia4%3e3.0.co;2-l
Becker CG, Becker T, Meyer RL, Schachner M (1999) Tenascin-R inhibits the growth of optic fibers in vitro but is rapidly eliminated during nerve regeneration in the salamander Pleurodeles waltl. J Neurosci 19(2):813–827. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.19-02-00813.1999
Lang DM, Monzon-Mayor M, Del Mar R-A, Yanes C, Santos E, Pesheva P (2008) Tenascin-R and axon growth-promoting molecules are up-regulated in the regenerating visual pathway of the lizard (Gallotia galloti). Dev Neurobiol 68(7):899–916. https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.20624
Shen Y, Tenney AP, Busch SA, Horn KP, Cuascut FX, Liu K, He Z, Silver J et al (2009) PTPsigma is a receptor for chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan, an inhibitor of neural regeneration. Science 326(5952):592–596. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1178310
Fisher D, Xing B, Dill J, Li H, Hoang HH, Zhao Z, Yang XL, Bachoo R et al (2011) Leukocyte common antigen-related phosphatase is a functional receptor for chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan axon growth inhibitors. J Neurosci 31(40):14051–14066. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1737-11.2011
Torres-Vázquez J, Gitler AD, Fraser SD, Berk JD, Van NP, Fishman MC, Childs S, Epstein JA et al (2004) Semaphorin-plexin signaling guides patterning of the developing vasculature. Dev Cell 7(1):117–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2004.06.008
Mecollari V, Nieuwenhuis B, Verhaagen J (2014) A perspective on the role of class III semaphorin signaling in central nervous system trauma. Front Cell Neurosci 8:328. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2014.00328
Andrews MR, Czvitkovich S, Dassie E, Vogelaar CF, Faissner A, Blits B, Gage FH, Ffrench-Constant C et al (2009) Alpha9 integrin promotes neurite outgrowth on tenascin-C and enhances sensory axon regeneration. J Neurosci 29(17):5546–5557. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0759-09.2009
Jones LS (1996) Integrins: possible functions in the adult CNS. Trends Neurosci 19(2):68–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-2236(96)89623-8
Yokosaki Y, Matsuura N, Higashiyama S, Murakami I, Obara M, Yamakido M, Shigeto N, Chen J et al (1998) Identification of the ligand binding site for the integrin alpha9 beta1 in the third fibronectin type III repeat of tenascin-C. J Biol Chem 273(19):11423–11428. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.19.11423
Pinkstaff JK, Detterich J, Lynch G, Gall C (1999) Integrin subunit gene expression is regionally differentiated in adult brain. J Neurosci 19(5):1541–1556. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.19-05-01541.1999
Staniszewska I, Sariyer IK, Lecht S, Brown MC, Walsh EM, Tuszynski GP, Safak M, Lazarovici P et al (2008) Integrin alpha9 beta1 is a receptor for nerve growth factor and other neurotrophins. J Cell Sci 121(Pt 4):504–513. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.000232
Wang A, Patrone L, McDonald JA, Sheppard D (1995) Expression of the integrin subunit alpha 9 in the murine embryo. Dev Dyn 204(4):421–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/aja.1002040408
Sapieha PS, Duplan L, Uetani N, Joly S, Tremblay ML, Kennedy TE, Di Polo A (2005) Receptor protein tyrosine phosphatase sigma inhibits axon regrowth in the adult injured CNS. Mol Cell Neurosci 28(4):625–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcn.2004.10.011
Lang BT, Cregg JM, DePaul MA, Tran AP, Xu K, Dyck SM, Madalena KM, Brown BP et al (2015) Modulation of the proteoglycan receptor PTPσ promotes recovery after spinal cord injury. Nature 518(7539):404–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13974
Ito S, Ozaki T, Morozumi M, Imagama S, Kadomatsu K, Sakamoto K (2021) Enoxaparin promotes functional recovery after spinal cord injury by antagonizing PTPRσ. Exp Neurol:113679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2021.113679
Li HJ, Pan YB, Sun ZL, Sun YY, Yang XT, Feng DF (2018) Inhibition of miR-21 ameliorates excessive astrocyte activation and promotes axon regeneration following optic nerve crush. Neuropharmacology 137:33–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2018.04.028
Han F, Huo Y, Huang CJ, Chen CL, Ye J (2015) MicroRNA-30b promotes axon outgrowth of retinal ganglion cells by inhibiting Semaphorin3A expression. Brain Res 1611:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.03.014
Chan-Juan H, Sen L, Li-Qianyu A, Jian Y, Rong-Di Y (2019) MicroRNA-30b regulates the polarity of retinal ganglion cells by inhibiting semaphorin-3A. Mol Vis 25:722–730
Fawcett JW (2017) An integrin approach to axon regeneration. Eye (Lond) 31(2):206–208. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2016.293
Shirvan A, Kimron M, Holdengreber V, Ziv I, Ben-Shaul Y, Melamed S, Melamed E, Barzilai A et al (2002) Anti-semaphorin 3A antibodies rescue retinal ganglion cells from cell death following optic nerve axotomy. J Biol Chem 277(51):49799–49807. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M204793200
Zhang J, Liu W, Zhang X, Lin S, Yan J, Ye J (2020) Sema3A inhibits axonal regeneration of retinal ganglion cells via ROCK2. Brain Res 1727:146555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2019.146555
Schreiber J, Schachner M, Schumacher U, Lorke DE (2013) Extracellular matrix alterations, accelerated leukocyte infiltration and enhanced axonal sprouting after spinal cord hemisection in tenascin-C-deficient mice. Acta Histochem 115(8):865–878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acthis.2013.04.009
Chen J, Joon Lee H, Jakovcevski I, Shah R, Bhagat N, Loers G, Liu HY, Meiners S et al (2010) The extracellular matrix glycoprotein tenascin-C is beneficial for spinal cord regeneration. Mol Ther 18(10):1769–1777. https://doi.org/10.1038/mt.2010.133
Cheah M, Andrews MR, Chew DJ, Moloney EB, Verhaagen J, Fässler R, Fawcett JW (2016) Expression of an Activated Integrin Promotes Long-Distance Sensory Axon Regeneration in the Spinal Cord. J Neurosci 36(27):7283–7297. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0901-16.2016
Czeh M, Gressens P, Kaindl AM (2011) The yin and yang of microglia. Dev Neurosci 33(3–4):199–209. https://doi.org/10.1159/000328989
Hanisch UK, Kettenmann H (2007) Microglia: active sensor and versatile effector cells in the normal and pathologic brain. Nat Neurosci 10(11):1387–1394. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1997
Nimmerjahn A, Kirchhoff F, Helmchen F (2005) Resting microglial cells are highly dynamic surveillants of brain parenchyma in vivo. Science 308(5726):1314–1318. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1110647
Prinz M, Jung S, Priller J (2019) Microglia Biology: One Century of Evolving Concepts. Cell 179(2):292–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.053
Davalos D, Grutzendler J, Yang G, Kim JV, Zuo Y, Jung S, Littman DR, Dustin ML et al (2005) ATP mediates rapid microglial response to local brain injury in vivo. Nat Neurosci 8(6):752–758. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1472
Kreutzberg GW (1996) Microglia: a sensor for pathological events in the CNS. Trends Neurosci 19(8):312–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-2236(96)10049-7
Jin X, Yamashita T (2016) Microglia in central nervous system repair after injury. J Biochem 159(5):491–496. https://doi.org/10.1093/jb/mvw009
Garden GA, Möller T (2006) Microglia biology in health and disease. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol 1(2):127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11481-006-9015-5
Chen Z, Jalabi W, Shpargel KB, Farabaugh KT, Dutta R, Yin X, Kidd GJ, Bergmann CC et al (2012) Lipopolysaccharide-induced microglial activation and neuroprotection against experimental brain injury is independent of hematogenous TLR4. J Neurosci 32(34):11706–11715. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0730-12.2012
Streit WJ (2002) Microglia as neuroprotective, immunocompetent cells of the CNS. Glia 40(2):133–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/glia.10154
Li Y, He X, Kawaguchi R, Zhang Y, Wang Q, Monavarfeshani A, Yang Z, Chen B et al (2020) Microglia-organized scar-free spinal cord repair in neonatal mice. Nature 587(7835):613–618. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2795-6
Bosco A, Inman DM, Steele MR, Wu G, Soto I, Marsh-Armstrong N, Hubbard WC, Calkins DJ et al (2008) Reduced retina microglial activation and improved optic nerve integrity with minocycline treatment in the DBA/2J mouse model of glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49(4):1437–1446. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.07-1337
Kitayama M, Ueno M, Itakura T, Yamashita T (2011) Activated microglia inhibit axonal growth through RGMa. PLoS One 6(9):e25234. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025234
Rice RA, Spangenberg EE, Yamate-Morgan H, Lee RJ, Arora RP, Hernandez MX, Tenner AJ, West BL et al (2015) Elimination of Microglia Improves Functional Outcomes Following Extensive Neuronal Loss in the Hippocampus. J Neurosci 35(27):9977–9989. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0336-15.2015
Mosser DM, Edwards JP (2008) Exploring the full spectrum of macrophage activation. Nat Rev Immunol 8(12):958–969. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri2448
Gordon S, Martinez FO (2010) Alternative activation of macrophages: mechanism and functions. Immunity 32(5):593–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2010.05.007
Kigerl KA, Gensel JC, Ankeny DP, Alexander JK, Donnelly DJ, Popovich PG (2009) Identification of two distinct macrophage subsets with divergent effects causing either neurotoxicity or regeneration in the injured mouse spinal cord. J Neurosci 29(43):13435–13444. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3257-09.2009
Mantovani A, Sica A, Sozzani S, Allavena P, Vecchi A, Locati M (2004) The chemokine system in diverse forms of macrophage activation and polarization. Trends Immunol 25(12):677–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2004.09.015
Bennett ML, Bennett FC, Liddelow SA, Ajami B, Zamanian JL, Fernhoff NB, Mulinyawe SB, Bohlen CJ et al (2016) New tools for studying microglia in the mouse and human CNS. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113(12):E1738-1746. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525528113
Mey J, Thanos S (1993) Intravitreal injections of neurotrophic factors support the survival of axotomized retinal ganglion cells in adult rats in vivo. Brain Res 602(2):304–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(93)90695-j
Fischer D (2012) Stimulating axonal regeneration of mature retinal ganglion cells and overcoming inhibitory signaling. Cell Tissue Res 349(1):79–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00441-011-1302-7
Jiang N, Li Z, Li Z, Zhang Y, Yu Z, Wan P, Zhu Y, Li Y et al (2020) Laquinimod exerts anti-inflammatory and antiapoptotic effects in retinal ischemia/reperfusion injury. Int Immunopharmacol 88:106989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106989
Wan P, Su W, Zhang Y, Li Z, Deng C, Li J, Jiang N, Huang S et al (2020) LncRNA H19 initiates microglial pyroptosis and neuronal death in retinal ischemia/reperfusion injury. Cell Death Differ 27(1):176–191. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41418-019-0351-4
Prinz M, Priller J (2014) Microglia and brain macrophages in the molecular age: from origin to neuropsychiatric disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 15(5):300–312. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3722
Elmore MR, Najafi AR, Koike MA, Dagher NN, Spangenberg EE, Rice RA, Kitazawa M, Matusow B et al (2014) Colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor signaling is necessary for microglia viability, unmasking a microglia progenitor cell in the adult brain. Neuron 82(2):380–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.02.040
Hilla AM, Diekmann H, Fischer D (2017) Microglia Are Irrelevant for Neuronal Degeneration and Axon Regeneration after Acute Injury. J Neurosci 37(25):6113–6124. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0584-17.2017
Leon S, Yin Y, Nguyen J, Irwin N, Benowitz LI (2000) Lens injury stimulates axon regeneration in the mature rat optic nerve. J Neurosci 20(12):4615–4626. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.20-12-04615.2000
Yin Y, Cui Q, Li Y, Irwin N, Fischer D, Harvey AR, Benowitz LI (2003) Macrophage-derived factors stimulate optic nerve regeneration. J Neurosci 23(6):2284–2293. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.23-06-02284.2003
David S, Bouchard C, Tsatas O, Giftochristos N (1990) Macrophages can modify the nonpermissive nature of the adult mammalian central nervous system. Neuron 5(4):463–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(90)90085-t
Li Y, Irwin N, Yin Y, Lanser M, Benowitz LI (2003) Axon regeneration in goldfish and rat retinal ganglion cells: differential responsiveness to carbohydrates and cAMP. J Neurosci 23(21):7830–7838. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.23-21-07830.2003
Yin Y, Henzl MT, Lorber B, Nakazawa T, Thomas TT, Jiang F, Langer R, Benowitz LI (2006) Oncomodulin is a macrophage-derived signal for axon regeneration in retinal ganglion cells. Nat Neurosci 9(6):843–852. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1701
Yin Y, Cui Q, Gilbert HY, Yang Y, Yang Z, Berlinicke C, Li Z, Zaverucha-do-Valle C et al (2009) Oncomodulin links inflammation to optic nerve regeneration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106(46):19587–19592. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907085106
Kurimoto T, Yin Y, Omura K, Gilbert HY, Kim D, Cen LP, Moko L, Kügler S et al (2010) Long-distance axon regeneration in the mature optic nerve: contributions of oncomodulin, cAMP, and pten gene deletion. J Neurosci 30(46):15654–15663. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4340-10.2010
Donnelly DJ, Popovich PG (2008) Inflammation and its role in neuroprotection, axonal regeneration and functional recovery after spinal cord injury. Exp Neurol 209(2):378–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2007.06.009
Baldwin KT, Carbajal KS, Segal BM, Giger RJ (2015) Neuroinflammation triggered by β-glucan/dectin-1 signaling enables CNS axon regeneration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112(8):2581–2586. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1423221112
Xie L, Yin Y, Benowitz L (2021) Chemokine CCL5 promotes robust optic nerve regeneration and mediates many of the effects of CNTF gene therapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 118 (9). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2017282118
Sas AR, Carbajal KS, Jerome AD, Menon R, Yoon C, Kalinski AL, Giger RJ, Segal BM (2020) A new neutrophil subset promotes CNS neuron survival and axon regeneration. Nat Immunol 21(12):1496–1505. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-020-00813-0
Leibinger M, Müller A, Andreadaki A, Hauk TG, Kirsch M, Fischer D (2009) Neuroprotective and axon growth-promoting effects following inflammatory stimulation on mature retinal ganglion cells in mice depend on ciliary neurotrophic factor and leukemia inhibitory factor. J Neurosci 29(45):14334–14341. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2770-09.2009
Müller A, Hauk TG, Fischer D (2007) Astrocyte-derived CNTF switches mature RGCs to a regenerative state following inflammatory stimulation. Brain 130(Pt 12):3308–3320. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awm257
Müller A, Hauk TG, Leibinger M, Marienfeld R, Fischer D (2009) Exogenous CNTF stimulates axon regeneration of retinal ganglion cells partially via endogenous CNTF. Mol Cell Neurosci 41(2):233–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcn.2009.03.002
Smith PD, Sun F, Park KK, Cai B, Wang C, Kuwako K, Martinez-Carrasco I, Connolly L et al (2009) SOCS3 deletion promotes optic nerve regeneration in vivo. Neuron 64(5):617–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2009.11.021
Park KK, Hu Y, Muhling J, Pollett MA, Dallimore EJ, Turnley AM, Cui Q, Harvey AR (2009) Cytokine-induced SOCS expression is inhibited by cAMP analogue: impact on regeneration in injured retina. Mol Cell Neurosci 41(3):313–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcn.2009.04.002
Leibinger M, Müller A, Gobrecht P, Diekmann H, Andreadaki A, Fischer D (2013) Interleukin-6 contributes to CNS axon regeneration upon inflammatory stimulation. Cell Death Dis 4(4):e609. https://doi.org/10.1038/cddis.2013.126
Mansour-Robaey S, Clarke DB, Wang YC, Bray GM, Aguayo AJ (1994) Effects of ocular injury and administration of brain-derived neurotrophic factor on survival and regrowth of axotomized retinal ganglion cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 91(5):1632–1636. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.5.1632
Pernet V, Di Polo A (2006) Synergistic action of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and lens injury promotes retinal ganglion cell survival, but leads to optic nerve dystrophy in vivo. Brain 129(Pt 4):1014–1026. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awl015
Diamond JS (2017) Inhibitory Interneurons in the Retina: Types, Circuitry, and Function. Annu Rev Vis Sci 3:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-vision-102016-061345
Rheaume BA, Jereen A, Bolisetty M, Sajid MS, Yang Y, Renna K, Sun L, Robson P et al (2018) Single cell transcriptome profiling of retinal ganglion cells identifies cellular subtypes. Nat Commun 9(1):2759. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05134-3
Helmstaedter M, Briggman KL, Turaga SC, Jain V, Seung HS, Denk W (2013) Connectomic reconstruction of the inner plexiform layer in the mouse retina. Nature 500(7461):168–174. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12346
Jia Y, Lee S, Zhuo YH, Zhou ZJ (2020) A retinal circuit for the suppressed-by-contrast receptive field of a polyaxonal amacrine cell. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117(17):9577–9583. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1913417117
Lee S, Chen L, Chen M, Ye M, Seal RP, Zhou ZJ (2014) An unconventional glutamatergic circuit in the retina formed by vGluT3 amacrine cells. Neuron 84(4):708–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.10.021
Tien NW, Kim T, Kerschensteiner D (2016) Target-Specific Glycinergic Transmission from VGluT3-Expressing Amacrine Cells Shapes Suppressive Contrast Responses in the Retina. Cell Rep 15(7):1369–1375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.04.025
Zhang C, McCall MA (2012) Receptor targets of amacrine cells. Vis Neurosci 29(1):11–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952523812000028
Goldberg JL, Klassen MP, Hua Y, Barres BA (2002) Amacrine-signaled loss of intrinsic axon growth ability by retinal ganglion cells. Science 296(5574):1860–1864. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1068428
Goldberg JL (2004) Intrinsic neuronal regulation of axon and dendrite growth. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14(5):551–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2004.08.012
Li Y, Andereggen L, Yuki K, Omura K, Yin Y, Gilbert HY, Erdogan B, Asdourian MS et al (2017) Mobile zinc increases rapidly in the retina after optic nerve injury and regulates ganglion cell survival and optic nerve regeneration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 114(2):E209-e218. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616811114
Zhang Y, Williams PR, Jacobi A, Wang C, Goel A, Hirano AA, Brecha NC, Kerschensteiner D et al (2019) Elevating Growth Factor Responsiveness and Axon Regeneration by Modulating Presynaptic Inputs. Neuron 103(1):39-51.e35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2019.04.033
Beier C, Hovhannisyan A, Weiser S, Kung J, Lee S, Lee DY, Huie P, Dalal R et al (2017) Deafferented Adult Rod Bipolar Cells Create New Synapses with Photoreceptors to Restore Vision. J Neurosci 37(17):4635–4644. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2570-16.2017
Strettoi E, Novelli E, Mazzoni F, Barone I, Damiani D (2010) Complexity of retinal cone bipolar cells. Prog Retin Eye Res 29(4):272–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2010.03.005
Euler T, Haverkamp S, Schubert T, Baden T (2014) Retinal bipolar cells: elementary building blocks of vision. Nat Rev Neurosci 15(8):507–519. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3783
McGinn TE, Galicia CA, Leoni DC, Partington N, Mitchell DM, Stenkamp DL (2019) Rewiring the Regenerated Zebrafish Retina: Reemergence of Bipolar Neurons and Cone-Bipolar Circuitry Following an Inner Retinal Lesion. Front Cell Dev Biol 7:95. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2019.00095
Hu M, Easter SS (1999) Retinal neurogenesis: the formation of the initial central patch of postmitotic cells. Dev Biol 207(2):309–321. https://doi.org/10.1006/dbio.1998.9031
D’Orazi FD, Zhao XF, Wong RO, Yoshimatsu T (2016) Mismatch of Synaptic Patterns between Neurons Produced in Regeneration and during Development of the Vertebrate Retina. Curr Biol 26(17):2268–2279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.06.063
McGinn TE, Mitchell DM, Meighan PC, Partington N, Leoni DC, Jenkins CE, Varnum MD, Stenkamp DL (2018) Restoration of Dendritic Complexity, Functional Connectivity, and Diversity of Regenerated Retinal Bipolar Neurons in Adult Zebrafish. J Neurosci 38(1):120–136. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3444-16.2017
Beckers A, Moons L (2019) Dendritic shrinkage after injury: a cellular killer or a necessity for axonal regeneration? Neural Regen Res 14(8):1313–1316. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.253505
Beckers A, Van Dyck A, Bollaerts I, Van Houcke J, Lefevere E, Andries L, Agostinone J, Van Hove I et al (2019) An Antagonistic Axon-Dendrite Interplay Enables Efficient Neuronal Repair in the Adult Zebrafish Central Nervous System. Mol Neurobiol 56(5):3175–3192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-018-1292-5
Cui Q, Yip HK, Zhao RC, So KF, Harvey AR (2003) Intraocular elevation of cyclic AMP potentiates ciliary neurotrophic factor-induced regeneration of adult rat retinal ganglion cell axons. Mol Cell Neurosci 22(1):49–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1044-7431(02)00037-4
Fournier AE, Takizawa BT, Strittmatter SM (2003) Rho kinase inhibition enhances axonal regeneration in the injured CNS. J Neurosci 23(4):1416–1423. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.23-04-01416.2003
Drummond ES, Rodger J, Penrose M, Robertson D, Hu Y, Harvey AR (2014) Effects of intravitreal injection of a Rho-GTPase inhibitor (BA-210), or CNTF combined with an analogue of cAMP, on the dendritic morphology of regenerating retinal ganglion cells. Restor Neurol Neurosci 32(3):391–402. https://doi.org/10.3233/rnn-130360
Francis MM, Freeman MR (2016) Dendrites actively restrain axon outgrowth and regeneration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113(20):5465–5466. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605215113
Chung SH, Awal MR, Shay J, McLoed MM, Mazur E, Gabel CV (2016) Novel DLK-independent neuronal regeneration in Caenorhabditis elegans shares links with activity-dependent ectopic outgrowth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113(20):E2852-2860. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1600564113
Pourcho RG (1996) Neurotransmitters in the retina. Curr Eye Res 15(7):797–803. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713689609003465
Hyman SE (2005) Neurotransmitters. Curr Biol 15(5):R154-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2005.02.037
Grünert U (2000) Distribution of GABA and glycine receptors on bipolar and ganglion cells in the mammalian retina. Microsc Res Tech 50(2):130–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0029(20000715)50:2%3c130::Aid-jemt5%3e3.0.Co;2-i
Tauck DL, Frosch MP, Lipton SA (1988) Characterization of GABA- and glycine-induced currents of solitary rodent retinal ganglion cells in culture. Neuroscience 27(1):193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4522(88)90230-8
Suzuki S, Tachibana M, Kaneko A (1990) Effects of glycine and GABA on isolated bipolar cells of the mouse retina. J Physiol 421:645–662. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1990.sp017967
Vaquero CF, de la Villa P (1999) Localisation of the GABA(C) receptors at the axon terminal of the rod bipolar cells of the mouse retina. Neurosci Res 35(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-0102(99)00050-4
Panter SS, Yum SW, Faden AI (1990) Alteration in extracellular amino acids after traumatic spinal cord injury. Ann Neurol 27(1):96–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410270115
McAdoo DJ, Xu GY, Robak G, Hughes MG (1999) Changes in amino acid concentrations over time and space around an impact injury and their diffusion through the rat spinal cord. Exp Neurol 159(2):538–544. https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.1999.7166
Liu D, Xu GY, Pan E, McAdoo DJ (1999) Neurotoxicity of glutamate at the concentration released upon spinal cord injury. Neuroscience 93(4):1383–1389. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-4522(99)00278-x
Xu GY, Hughes MG, Ye Z, Hulsebosch CE, McAdoo DJ (2004) Concentrations of glutamate released following spinal cord injury kill oligodendrocytes in the spinal cord. Exp Neurol 187(2):329–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2004.01.029
Demediuk P, Daly MP, Faden AI (1989) Effect of impact trauma on neurotransmitter and nonneurotransmitter amino acids in rat spinal cord. J Neurochem 52(5):1529–1536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.1989.tb09204.x
Romaus-Sanjurjo D, Ledo-García R, Fernández-López B, Hanslik K, Morgan JR, Barreiro-Iglesias A, Rodicio MC (2018) GABA promotes survival and axonal regeneration in identifiable descending neurons after spinal cord injury in larval lampreys. Cell Death Dis 9(6):663. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-018-0704-9
Goldberg JL, Espinosa JS, Xu Y, Davidson N, Kovacs GT, Barres BA (2002) Retinal ganglion cells do not extend axons by default: promotion by neurotrophic signaling and electrical activity. Neuron 33(5):689–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00602-5
Li S, Yang C, Zhang L, Gao X, Wang X, Liu W, Wang Y, Jiang S et al (2016) Promoting axon regeneration in the adult CNS by modulation of the melanopsin/GPCR signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113(7):1937–1942. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1523645113
Tagami Y, Kurimoto T, Miyoshi T, Morimoto T, Sawai H, Mimura O (2009) Axonal regeneration induced by repetitive electrical stimulation of crushed optic nerve in adult rats. Jpn J Ophthalmol 53(3):257–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-009-0657-8
Yin H, Yin H, Zhang W, Miao Q, Qin Z, Guo S, Fu Q, Ma J et al (2016) Transcorneal electrical stimulation promotes survival of retinal ganglion cells after optic nerve transection in rats accompanied by reduced microglial activation and TNF-α expression. Brain Res 1650:10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2016.08.034
Lim JH, Stafford BK, Nguyen PL, Lien BV, Wang C, Zukor K, He Z, Huberman AD (2016) Neural activity promotes long-distance, target-specific regeneration of adult retinal axons. Nat Neurosci 19(8):1073–1084. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4340
de Lima S, Koriyama Y, Kurimoto T, Oliveira JT, Yin Y, Li Y, Gilbert HY, Fagiolini M et al (2012) Full-length axon regeneration in the adult mouse optic nerve and partial recovery of simple visual behaviors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109(23):9149–9154. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1119449109
West AE, Greenberg ME (2011) Neuronal activity-regulated gene transcription in synapse development and cognitive function. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3 (6). https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a005744
Yap EL, Greenberg ME (2018) Activity-Regulated Transcription: Bridging the Gap between Neural Activity and Behavior. Neuron 100(2):330–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2018.10.013
Trakhtenberg EF, Li Y, Feng Q, Tso J, Rosenberg PA, Goldberg JL, Benowitz LI (2018) Zinc chelation and Klf9 knockdown cooperatively promote axon regeneration after optic nerve injury. Exp Neurol 300:22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2017.10.025
Goldstein IM, Ostwald P, Roth S (1996) Nitric oxide: a review of its role in retinal function and disease. Vision Res 36(18):2979–2994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(96)00017-x
Kim IB, Oh SJ, Chun MH (2000) Neuronal nitric oxide synthase immunoreactive neurons in the mammalian retina. Microsc Res Tech 50(2):112–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0029(20000715)50:2%3c112::Aid-jemt3%3e3.0.Co;2-s
Yamamoto R, Bredt DS, Snyder SH, Stone RA (1993) The localization of nitric oxide synthase in the rat eye and related cranial ganglia. Neuroscience 54(1):189–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4522(93)90393-t
Aras MA, Aizenman E (2011) Redox regulation of intracellular zinc: molecular signaling in the life and death of neurons. Antioxid Redox Signal 15(8):2249–2263. https://doi.org/10.1089/ars.2010.3607
Spahl DU, Berendji-Grün D, Suschek CV, Kolb-Bachofen V, Kröncke KD (2003) Regulation of zinc homeostasis by inducible NO synthase-derived NO: nuclear metallothionein translocation and intranuclear Zn2+ release. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100(24):13952–13957. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2335190100
Fenrich KK, Rose PK (2009) Spinal interneuron axons spontaneously regenerate after spinal cord injury in the adult feline. J Neurosci 29(39):12145–12158. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0897-09.2009
Doyon N, Vinay L, Prescott SA, De Koninck Y (2016) Chloride Regulation: A Dynamic Equilibrium Crucial for Synaptic Inhibition. Neuron 89(6):1157–1172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.02.030
Yang SG, Li CP, Peng XQ, Teng ZQ, Liu CM, Zhou FQ (2020) Strategies to Promote Long-Distance Optic Nerve Regeneration. Front Cell Neurosci 14:119. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2020.00119
Knöll B, Isenmann S, Kilic E, Walkenhorst J, Engel S, Wehinger J, Bähr M, Drescher U (2001) Graded expression patterns of ephrin-As in the superior colliculus after lesion of the adult mouse optic nerve. Mech Dev 106(1–2):119–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0925-4773(01)00431-2
Petrausch B, Jung M, Leppert CA, Stuermer CA (2000) Lesion-induced regulation of netrin receptors and modification of netrin-1 expression in the retina of fish and grafted rats. Mol Cell Neurosci 16(4):350–364. https://doi.org/10.1006/mcne.2000.0877
Symonds AC, King CE, Bartlett CA, Sauvé Y, Lund RD, Beazley LD, Dunlop SA, Rodger J (2007) EphA5 and ephrin-A2 expression during optic nerve regeneration: a ‘two-edged sword.’ Eur J Neurosci 25(3):744–752. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05321.x
Su W, Li Z, Jia Y, Zhuo Y (2014) Rapamycin is neuroprotective in a rat chronic hypertensive glaucoma model. PLoS One 9(6):e99719. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099719
Su WR, Li ZH, Jia Y, Zhu YT, Cai WJ, Wan PX, Zhang YY, Zheng SG et al (2017) microRNA-21a-5p/PDCD4 axis regulates mesenchymal stem cell-induced neuroprotection in acute glaucoma. J Mol Cell Biol 9(4):289–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmcb/mjx022
Wan PX, Su WR, Zhang YY, Li ZD, Deng CB, Zhuo YH (2017) Trimetazidine protects retinal ganglion cells from acute glaucoma via the Nrf2/Ho-1 pathway. Clin Sci 131(18):2363–2375. https://doi.org/10.1042/cs20171182
Yi W, Lu Y, Zhong S, Zhang M, Sun L, Dong H, Wang M, Wei M et al (2021) A single-cell transcriptome atlas of the aging human and macaque retina. Natl Sci Rev 8(4):nwaa179. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwaa179
Wang S, Zheng Y, Li Q, He X, Ren R, Zhang W, Song M, Hu H et al (2021) Deciphering primate retinal aging at single-cell resolution. Protein Cell 12(11):889–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-020-00791-x
van Zyl T, Yan W, McAdams A, Peng YR, Shekhar K, Regev A, Juric D, Sanes JR (2020) Cell atlas of aqueous humor outflow pathways in eyes of humans and four model species provides insight into glaucoma pathogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117(19):10339–10349. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2001250117
Chen M, Chen Q, Sun X, Shen W, Liu B, Zhong X, Leng Y, Li C et al (2010) Generation of retinal ganglion-like cells from reprogrammed mouse fibroblasts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(11):5970–5978. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.09-4504
Deng F, Chen M, Liu Y, Hu H, Xiong Y, Xu C, Liu Y, Li K et al (2016) Stage-specific differentiation of iPSCs toward retinal ganglion cell lineage. Mol Vis 22:536–547
Gill KP, Hung SS, Sharov A, Lo CY, Needham K, Lidgerwood GE, Jackson S, Crombie DE et al (2016) Enriched retinal ganglion cells derived from human embryonic stem cells. Sci Rep 6:30552. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep30552
Parameswaran S, Balasubramanian S, Babai N, Qiu F, Eudy JD, Thoreson WB, Ahmad I (2010) Induced pluripotent stem cells generate both retinal ganglion cells and photoreceptors: therapeutic implications in degenerative changes in glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration. Stem Cells 28(4):695–703. https://doi.org/10.1002/stem.320
Sluch VM, Chamling X, Liu MM, Berlinicke CA, Cheng J, Mitchell KL, Welsbie DS, Zack DJ (2017) Enhanced Stem Cell Differentiation and Immunopurification of Genome Engineered Human Retinal Ganglion Cells. Stem Cells Transl Med 6(11):1972–1986. https://doi.org/10.1002/sctm.17-0059
Sluch VM, Davis CH, Ranganathan V, Kerr JM, Krick K, Martin R, Berlinicke CA, Marsh-Armstrong N et al (2015) Differentiation of human ESCs to retinal ganglion cells using a CRISPR engineered reporter cell line. Sci Rep 5:16595. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16595
Li K, Zhong X, Yang S, Luo Z, Li K, Liu Y, Cai S, Gu H et al (2017) HiPSC-derived retinal ganglion cells grow dendritic arbors and functional axons on a tissue-engineered scaffold. Acta Biomater 54:117–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.02.032
Venugopalan P, Wang Y, Nguyen T, Huang A, Muller KJ, Goldberg JL (2016) Transplanted neurons integrate into adult retinas and respond to light. Nat Commun 7:10472. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10472
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Prof. Larry Benowitz (Boston Children’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School) for instructive advice; Dr. Yingting Zhu (Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center) for comments on the manuscript; and Editage (www.editage.cn) for English language editing.
Funding
This work received support from the National Key R&D Program of China (2020YFA0112701 to YZ), National Natural Science Foundation of China (81870657 to YL, 81870658 and 82171057 to YZ), Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2018A030313049 to YL), Guangdong Medical Research Foundation (A2018052 to YL), and Fundamental Research Funds for the Youth Scholars of Sun Yat-sen University (18ykpy32 to YL).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
QZ, YL, and YZ conceptualized the study. QZ wrote the manuscript and designed the figure. QZ, YL, and YZ revised and finalized the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
Not applicable.
Consent to Participate
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
Not applicable.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, Q., Li, Y. & Zhuo, Y. Synaptic or Non-synaptic? Different Intercellular Interactions with Retinal Ganglion Cells in Optic Nerve Regeneration. Mol Neurobiol 59, 3052–3072 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-022-02781-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-022-02781-y