Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar 16;130(4):2024–2040. doi: 10.1172/JCI125771

Figure 6. In vivo delivery of S138A hPfn1 elicits regeneration of peripheral and CNS axons.

Figure 6

(A) Strategy to assess peripheral regeneration following viral delivery of S138A hPfn1. (B) SCG10 staining of longitudinal sciatic nerve sections at 3 days postinjury (PI); red dashed lines indicate the lesion epicenter, red arrowheads highlight regenerating axons. Scale bars: 200 μm. (C) SCG10 fluorescence versus distance to lesion epicenter. (D) Mean distance of GFP+ sciatic nerve axons regenerating distally to the lesion edge 3 days PI. Data represent mean ± SEM (n = 5–9 animals/condition). *P < 0.05 by 1-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test. (E) 3D surface–rendered reconstructions, (F) zoom-in of E, and (G) volume quantification of NMJs fluorescently labeled with α-bungarotoxin (BTX), 28 days PI. Scale bars: 50 μm (E) and 10 μm (F). (H) Motor nerve conduction velocity, 28 days PI. In G and H, data represent mean ± SEM (n = 4–8 animals/condition). *P < 0.05 by Student’s t test. NS, not significant. (I) von Frey hair test, 21 and 28 days PI. Data represent mean ± SEM (n = 5–10 animals/condition). **P < 0.01; NS, not significant related to AAV-GFP uninjured condition. ##P < 0.01, ####P < 0.0001 refers to AAV-GFP versus AAV-GFP.P2A.S138A hPfn1 animals; both by 2-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test. (J) Strategy to assess CNS regeneration following delivery of AAV-GFP and AAV-GFP.P2A.S138A hPfn1. (K) Injured spinal cords 6 weeks following transection. Scale bars: 100 μm. Red dashed line, lesion border; arrowheads, GFP+ axons within the lesion core; r, rostral; c, caudal; d, dorsal; v, ventral. (L) Zoom-ins of K. Scale bars: 40 μm. (M) Number of GFP+ axons regenerating within the glial scar. (N) Distance (rostral to caudal) of regenerating axons and (O) percentage of GFP+ axons at different distance ranges from the injury border. Data represent mean ± SEM (n = 5–7 animals/condition). *P < 0.05 by Student’s t test. NS, not significant.