| Literature DB >> 31105526 |
Maria M Benedetto1,2, Maria A Contin1,2.
Abstract
Light poEntities:
Keywords: LED light; electroretinogram; fatty acid; oxidative stress; retinal light damage
Year: 2019 PMID: 31105526 PMCID: PMC6499158 DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2019.00139
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5102 Impact factor: 5.505
Figure 1Outer nuclear layer analysis. (A) Rat retinas maintained in dark for 7 days (DD). (B–C) Retinas from rats exposed 6 (LL6) or 8 (LL8) days to constant light (200 lx). (D) Quantification of ONL nuclei; rat retina images corresponding to controls [(LD cycle, RT cycle and non-exposure to light (DD)] or exposure to 200 lx LED light (LL) for 2, 4, 6, and 8 days were analyzed to quantify photoreceptor survival. Data are mean ± standard error (SE), n = 2 animals/group from five independent experiments, *p < 0.05 vs. DD and RT by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan’s post hoc test. ONL, outer nuclear layer; INL, inner nuclear layer; GCL, ganglion cell layer. Scale bar indicates 30 μm.
Figure 2Oxidative stress study. (A–C) DHE staining at DD, LL2 and 8 days of light-emitting diode (LED) light exposure. Arrowheads show DHE positive cells in the ONL. (D) Reactive oxygen species (ROS) production detection by Flow cytometry using the DCFH-DA probe in controls (DD and LD) and in animals exposed to 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 days to constant light (LL2–8). Data are mean ± SE, n = 1 animal/group from three independent experiments, *p < 0.05 vs. DD by Kruskal Wallis. ONL, outer nuclear layer; INL, inner nuclear layer; GCL, ganglion cell layer. Scale bar indicates 30 μm.
Figure 3Catalase activity study in retinal light damage. CAT activity expressed as U/mg prot.ml.min in controls (DD and RT) and rats exposed at different days of LL. Data are mean ± SE, n = 1 animal/group from three independent experiments, p = 0.216 by one-way ANOVA and Duncan’s post hoc test.
Figure 4Fatty acid composition in light-treated rat retinas. (A) Full scan GC-MS total ion chromatograms of rat retina from controls (DD and LD) and rats exposed to 2, 4, 6 and 8 days of LL. 16:0, palmitic acid; 18:0, stearic acid; 20:4 n-6, arachidonic acid; 22:6 n-3, docosahexaenoic acid. (B–E) Quantification of palmitic (B), stearic (C), arachidonic (D) and docosahexaenoic acid (E) from controls (DD, RT and LD) and animals exposed for 2, 4, 6 and 8 days of constant light (LL), expressed as a percentage of total fatty acids, respectively. Data are mean ± SE, n = 1 animal/group from three independent experiments, *p < 0.05 vs. DD and LD; +p < 0.05 vs. DD; #p < 0.05 vs. RT and LD, by Kruskal-Wallis.
Figure 5Linear correlation analysis between stearic and docosahexaenoic acid in light-treated retinas. (A) Control animals maintained in DD. (B–D) Animals maintained for 4, 6 and 8 days at constant light, respectively. ρ: pearson correlation coefficient, n = 1 animal/group from three independent experiments.
Figure 6Electroretinogram (ERG) analysis in animals exposed to dark period. Animals exposed for 8 days of constant light with dark periods of 2, 4, 6, 10 and 12 h per day during subjective night (DP 2–8); DD, constant dark. DP, dark period.