臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Traditionally regarded as supporting cells, glia cells are structurally and functionally poised as ideal sensors and regulators of local microenvironments. Emerging evidence suggests that glia have key roles in regulating neuronal development. The differentiated type of neuroblastoma glioma hybrid cell line, NG108-15, has widely used in in vitro studies instead of primary-cultured neurons. We culture NG108-15 cells on different sizes of nanodot arrays to examine how glia cells sense nanoenvironment stimulis and regulate neuronal development. Here we show that different nanodot size arrays change the number of neuroblastoma cells on unit area of glioma cells. Our results show that glia can sense nanoenvironment stimulis and response in different regulation of neuronal development. By examining gene expression, nanodot sizes also influence glia-mediated neuronal factor, such as Wnt3 and BDNF. Our results show that glia can sense nanoenvironment stimulis and response in different regulation of neuronal development. The nanodot arrays can serve as an appropriate tool for investigating glia-neuron interactions.

Traditionally regarded as supporting cells, glia cells are structurally and functionally poised as ideal sensors and regulators of local microenvironments. Emerging evidence suggests that glia have key roles in regulating neuronal development. The differentiated type of neuroblastoma glioma hybrid cell line, NG108-15, has widely used in in vitro studies instead of primary-cultured neurons. We culture NG108-15 cells on different sizes of nanodot arrays to examine how glia cells sense nanoenvironment stimulis and regulate neuronal development. Here we show that different nanodot size arrays change the number of neuroblastoma cells on unit area of glioma cells. Our results show that glia can sense nanoenvironment stimulis and response in different regulation of neuronal development. By examining gene expression, nanodot sizes also influence glia-mediated neuronal factor, such as Wnt3 and BDNF. Our results show that glia can sense nanoenvironment stimulis and response in different regulation of neuronal development. The nanodot arrays can serve as an appropriate tool for investigating glia-neuron interactions.

1. Introduction 1
2. Materials and methods 3
2.1 Fabrication of the nanodevice/matrix of nanodot arrays 3
2.2 Cell culture 3
2.3 Scanning electron microscopy 3
2.4 Immunostaining of vinculin and phalloidin 4
2.5 Statistics 5
3. Result and discussion 7
3.1 Fabrication of an integrated nanodot array device 7
3.2 Different morphological changes of NG108-15 on nanodot arrays 7
3.3 The sizes of nanodot influence glia-neuron interaction 8
3.4 The sizes of nanodot array also influence processes of glioma cells 9
4. Conclusion 11
Reference 20

1. N. O. Glebova, D. D. Ginty, Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 28, 191 (2005).
2. W. Qin, W. A. Bauman, C. Cardozo, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1211, 66 (2010).
3. K. D. Anderson, Journal of neurotrauma 21, 1371 (2004).
4. J. H. Kim et al., Nature 418, 50 (2002).
5. M. Fava, K. S. Kendler, Neuron 28, 335 (2000).
6. M. Goedert, M. Spillantini, R. Jakes, D. Rutherford, R. Crowther, Neuron 3, 519 (1989).
7. A. M. Taylor et al., Nature methods 2, 599 (2005).
8. C. Chalfoun, G. Wirth, G. Evans, Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 10, 309 (2006).
9. M. Nedergaard, B. Ransom, S. A. Goldman, TRENDS in Neurosciences 26, 523 (2003).
10. E. M. Ullian, K. S. Christopherson, B. A. Barres, Glia 47, 209 (2004).
11. T. W. Wang, H. Zhang, J. M. Parent, Development 132, 2721 (2005).
12. T. Ueki et al., The Journal of neuroscience 23, 11732 (2003).
13. J. P. Kaiser, A. Reinmann, A. Bruinink, Biomaterials 27, 5230 (2006).
14. M. M. Stevens, J. H. George, Science 310, 1135 (2005).
15. G. A. Silva et al., Science 303, 1352 (2004).
16. M. Schindler, I. Ahmed, J. Kamal, Biomaterials 26, 5624 (2005).
17. E. Cukierman, R. Pankov, K. M. Yamada, Current opinion in cell biology 14, 633 (2002).
18. V. Brunetti et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 6264 (2010).
19. E. Cavalcanti-Adam et al., Biophysical journal 92, 2964 (2007).
20. C. Choi, S. Hagvall, B. Wu, J. Dunn, R. Beygui, Biomaterials 28, 1672 (2007).
21. F. Yang, R. Murugan, S. Wang, S. Ramakrishna, Biomaterials 26, 2603 (2005).
22. B. Zhu et al., Biomaterials 25, 4215 (2004).
23. P. Wang, L. Li, C. Zhang, Q. Lei, W. Fang, Biomaterials 31, 6201 (2010).
24. C. Xie et al., Nano Letters, 273.
25. N. Fredin, A. Broderick, M. Buck, D. Lynn, Biomacromolecules 10, 994 (2009).
26. S. Shankar, L. Rizzello, R. Cingolani, R. Rinaldi, P. Pompa, ACS nano 3, 893 (2009).
27. F. Johansson, P. Carlberg, N. Danielsen, L. Montelius, M. Kanje, Biomaterials 27, 1251 (2006).
28. C. H. Choi et al., Biomaterials 28, 1672 (2007).
29. J. Park, S. Bauer, K. von der Mark, P. Schmuki, Nano Letters 7, 1686 (2007).
30. Y. C. Hung, H. A. Pan, S. M. Tai, G. S. Huang, Lab Chip 10, 1189 (2010).
31. C. T. Wu, F. H. Ko, H. Y. Hwang, Microelectronic engineering 83, 1567 (2006).
32. D. Lie et al., NATURE-LONDON- 7063, 1370 (2005).
33. P. M. Lledo, M. Alonso, M. S. Grubb, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7, 179 (2006).
34. D. K. Ma, G. Ming, H. Song, Current opinion in neurobiology 15, 514 (2005).
35. H. Scharfman et al., Experimental neurology 192, 348 (2005).
36. C. Rossi et al., European Journal of Neuroscience 24, 1850 (2006).
37. P. Mohapel, H. Frielingsdorf, J. Haggblad, O. Zachrisson, P. Brundin, Neuroscience 132, 767 (2005).