SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Aquaporin-9 in the Brain Inflammatory Response: Evidence from Mice Injected with the Parkinsonogenic Toxin MPP.

Biomolecules · 2023-03-24

DOI: 10.3390/biom13040588PMID: 37189335

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

More than 20 years have passed since the first demonstration of Aquaporin-9 (AQP9) in the brain. Yet its precise localization and function in brain tissue remain unresolved. In peripheral tissues, AQP9 is expressed in leukocytes where it is involved in systemic inflammation processes. In this study, we hypothesized that AQP9 plays a proinflammatory role in the brain, analogous to its role in the periphery. We also explored whether Aqp9 is expressed in microglial cells, which would be supportive of this hypothesis. Our results show that targeted deletion of Aqp9 significantly suppressed the inflammatory response to the parkinsonian toxin 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (MPP+). This toxin induces a strong inflammatory response in brain. After intrastriatal injections of MPP+, the increase in transcript levels of proinflammatory genes was less pronounced in AQP9-/- mice compared with wild-type controls. Further, in isolated cell subsets, validated by flow cytometry we demonstrated that Aqp9 transcripts are expressed in microglial cells, albeit at lower concentrations than in astrocytes. The present analysis provides novel insight into the role of AQP9 in the brain and opens new avenues for research in the field of neuroinflammation and chronic neurodegenerative disease.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.