| Literature DB >> 36232222 |
Elizebeth O Akansha1, Bang V Bui2, Shonraj B Ganeshrao1,3, Pugazhandhi Bakthavatchalam4, Sivakumar Gopalakrishnan5, Susmitha Mattam1, Radhika R Poojary1, Judith S Jathanna1, Judy Jose1, Nagarajan N Theruveethi1.
Abstract
Evidence suggests that prolonged blue-light exposure can impact vision; however, less is known about its impact on non-visual higher-order functions in the brain, such as learning and memory. Blue-light-blocking lenses (BBLs) claim to reduce these potential impacts. Hence, we assessed structural and functional hippocampal alterations following blue-light exposure and the protective efficacy of BBLs. Male Wistar rats were divided into (n = 6 in each group) normal control (NC), blue-light exposure (LE), and blue-light with BBLs (Crizal Prevencia, CP and DuraVision Blue, DB) groups. After 28 days of light exposure (12:12 light: dark cycle), rats were trained for the Morris water maze memory retention test, and brain tissues were sectioned for hippocampal neuronal analysis using Golgi and Cresyl violet stains. The memory retention test was significantly delayed (p < 0.05) in LE compared with DB groups on day 1 of training. Comparison of Golgi-stained neurons showed significant structural alterations, particularly in the basal dendrites of hippocampal neurons in the LE group, with BBLs significantly mitigating these structural changes (p < 0.05). Comparison of Cresyl-violet-stained neurons revealed significantly (p < 0.001) increased degenerated hippocampal neurons in LE rats, with fewer degenerated neurons in the CP lens group for CA1 neurons (p < 0.05), and for both CP and DB groups (p < 0.05) for CA3 neurons. Thus, in addition to documented effects on visual centers, high-level blue-light exposure also results in degeneration in hippocampal neurons with associated behavioral deficits. These changes can be partially ameliorated with blue-light-blocking lenses.Entities:
Keywords: behavior analysis; blue-light blocking lenses (BBLs); hippocampus; light-emitting diodes (LEDs); retinal damage
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36232222 PMCID: PMC9564388 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912922
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1(A) Representative track plots for an animal from the four groups. NC, left top corner; LE, right top corner; CP, left bottom corner; and DB, right bottom corner (right side). (B) Group (±SD) escape latency (s) on the 5 consecutive trial two-way ANOVA indicated a significance difference (p < 0.05) on day 1 to day 3, but not days 4 or 5.
Figure 2Representative micrographs of Golgi–Cox-stained CA1 and CA3 neurons. (A) Normal Control, NC (CA1) apical (red arrow) and basal dendrites (blue arrow) are indicated along with the soma (orange circle). (B) NC (CA3). (C) Light exposure, LE (CA1). (D) LE (CA3). (E) Light exposure with the CP lens (CA1). (F) LE + CP (CA3). (G) Light exposure with the DB lens (CA1). (H) LE + DB (CA3).
Figure 3Averaged (±SD) apical and basal branching and intersection points for CA1 and CA3 neurons across all the groups for every 20 microns ranging from 20 to 140 µm. Values from total of 12 hippocampal neurons (CA1 and CA3; in each region, there 2 neurons from n = 6 animals/group). Significance determined using Tukey’s post hoc analysis is denoted by “ln”, which indicates interactions between treatment group (Tx) and distance (D).
Figure 4Representative micrograph of Cresyl-violet-stained CA1 and CA3 neurons. (A) Normal control CA1 region. Black arrow indicates a healthy neuron. (B) Normal control CA3 region. (C) light exposure (LE) CA1 region. (D) LE CA3 region. Red arrow indicates a degenerated neuron. (E) CP lens CA1 region. (F) CP lens CA3 region. (G) DB lens CA1 region. (H) DB lens CA3 region.
Figure 5(A) Comparison of the healthy and degenerated CA1 and (B) CA3 neurons. Data for n = 6 animals from each group are shown as the mean ± SD for healthy and degenerated neurons.