PURPOSE: The degeneration of retinal ganglion cells (RGC) in the glaucomatous retina is accompanied by activation of the classical complement cascade. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether complement component C1q binding and activation of the complement cascade in the glaucomatous retina requires the presence of immunoglobulins. METHODS: Experimental glaucoma was induced in normal mice and those carrying a targeted deletion of the RAG1 gene. Binding of C1q to RGC and accumulation of C3 and C5b-9 was investigated using immunohistochemical and proteomic approaches. Damage to the optic nerve and RGC was determined and compared between the two strains. Complement activation and accumulation were also evaluated in vitro using dissociated retinal cell cultures. RESULTS: C1q was detected in the RGC layer in both RAG1(-/-) and control mice with elevated IOP, but not in mice with normal IOP. Proteomic analysis of retinal membrane fractions indicated that C1q and C3 are membrane bound to a similar degree in RAG1(-/-) and control mice with elevated IOP. The absence of Ig does not affect the rate of axonal damage or RGC loss. Furthermore, cultured RGC maintained in serum-free media are also C1q and C3 immunoreactive, demonstrating that Ig is not required for C1q binding to damaged RGC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that lack of immunoglobulins and mature T/B cells does not influence the progression of glaucoma. Furthermore, immunoglobulins do not appear to be required for C1q binding and complement cascade activation on damaged RGC. These findings suggest that C1q recognizes an alternative binding partner expressed by stressed RGC.
PURPOSE: The degeneration of retinal ganglion cells (RGC) in the glaucomatous retina is accompanied by activation of the classical complement cascade. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether complement component C1q binding and activation of the complement cascade in the glaucomatous retina requires the presence of immunoglobulins. METHODS: Experimental glaucoma was induced in normal mice and those carrying a targeted deletion of the RAG1 gene. Binding of C1q to RGC and accumulation of C3 and C5b-9 was investigated using immunohistochemical and proteomic approaches. Damage to the optic nerve and RGC was determined and compared between the two strains. Complement activation and accumulation were also evaluated in vitro using dissociated retinal cell cultures. RESULTS:C1q was detected in the RGC layer in both RAG1(-/-) and control mice with elevated IOP, but not in mice with normal IOP. Proteomic analysis of retinal membrane fractions indicated that C1q and C3 are membrane bound to a similar degree in RAG1(-/-) and control mice with elevated IOP. The absence of Ig does not affect the rate of axonal damage or RGC loss. Furthermore, cultured RGC maintained in serum-free media are also C1q and C3 immunoreactive, demonstrating that Ig is not required for C1q binding to damaged RGC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that lack of immunoglobulins and mature T/B cells does not influence the progression of glaucoma. Furthermore, immunoglobulins do not appear to be required for C1q binding and complement cascade activation on damaged RGC. These findings suggest that C1q recognizes an alternative binding partner expressed by stressed RGC.
Authors: Wanchao Ma; Vivek Rai; Barry I Hudson; Fei Song; Ann Marie Schmidt; Gaetano R Barile Journal: Cell Immunol Date: 2012-02-13 Impact factor: 4.868
Authors: Kei Morohoshi; Nishal Patel; Masaharu Ohbayashi; Victor Chong; Hans E Grossniklaus; Alan C Bird; Santa J Ono Journal: Exp Mol Pathol Date: 2011-10-06 Impact factor: 3.362
Authors: M Botto; C Dell'Agnola; A E Bygrave; E M Thompson; H T Cook; F Petry; M Loos; P P Pandolfi; M J Walport Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1998-05 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: R William Vandivier; Carol Anne Ogden; Valerie A Fadok; Peter R Hoffmann; Kevin K Brown; Marina Botto; Mark J Walport; James H Fisher; Peter M Henson; Kelly E Greene Journal: J Immunol Date: 2002-10-01 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Wei Zhu; Oliver W Gramlich; Lauren Laboissonniere; Ankur Jain; Val C Sheffield; Jeffrey M Trimarchi; Budd A Tucker; Markus H Kuehn Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Sheri L Peterson; Yiqing Li; Christina J Sun; Kimberly A Wong; Kylie S Leung; Silmara de Lima; Nicholas J Hanovice; Kenya Yuki; Beth Stevens; Larry I Benowitz Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2021-08-20 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Stephanie C Joachim; Christine Mondon; Oliver W Gramlich; Franz H Grus; H Burkhard Dick Journal: J Mol Neurosci Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 3.444
Authors: Gülgün Tezel; Ivey L Thornton; Melissa G Tong; Cheng Luo; Xiangjun Yang; Jian Cai; David W Powell; Joern B Soltau; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Oliver W Gramlich; Qiong J Ding; Wei Zhu; Amy Cook; Michael G Anderson; Markus H Kuehn Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 7.801
Authors: Oliver W Gramlich; Anthony J Burand; Alex J Brown; Riley J Deutsch; Markus H Kuehn; James A Ankrum Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Oliver W Gramlich; Julia Teister; Mareike Neumann; Xue Tao; Sabine Beck; Harald D von Pein; Norbert Pfeiffer; Franz H Grus Journal: J Neuroinflammation Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 8.322
Authors: Vicki Chrysostomou; Sandra Galic; Peter van Wijngaarden; Ian A Trounce; Gregory R Steinberg; Jonathan G Crowston Journal: Aging Cell Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 9.304