Differing phagocytic capacities of accessory and main olfactory ensheathing cells and the implication for olfactory glia transplantation therapies
Open accessAbstract
The rodent olfactory systems comprise the main olfactory system for the detection of odours and the accessory olfactory system which detects pheromones. In both systems, olfactory axon fascicles are ensheathed by olfactory glia, termed olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs), which are crucial for the growth and maintenance of the olfactory nerve. The growth-promoting and phagocytic characteristics of OECs make them potential candidates for neural repair therapies such as transplantation to repair the injured spinal cord. However, transplanting mixed populations of glia with unknown properties may lead to variations in outcomes for neural repair. As the phagocytic capacity of the accessory OECs has not yet been determined, we compared the phagocytic capacity of accessory and main OECs in vivo and in vitro. In normal healthy animals, the accessory OECs accumulated considerably less axon debris than main OECs in vivo. Analysis of freshly dissected OECs showed that accessory OECs contained 20% less fluorescent axon debris than main OECs. However, when assayed in vitro with exogenous axon debris added to the culture, the accessory OECs phagocytosed almost 20% more debris than main OECs. After surgical removal of one olfactory bulb which induced the degradation of main and accessory olfactory sensory axons, the accessory OECs responded by phagocytosing the axon debris. We conclude that while accessory OECs have the capacity to phagocytose axon debris, there are distinct differences in their phagocytic capacity compared to main OECs. These distinct differences may be of importance when preparing OECs for neural transplant repair therapies.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Most microbes are likely eliminated by phagocytic glia, olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) and trigeminal Schwann cells (TgSCs), should they penetrate the epithelium and reach the nerves.
“Most microbes are, however, likely eliminated by phagocytic glia, olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) and trigeminal Schwann cells (TgSCs), should they penetrate the epithelium and reach the nerves29–31.”
From Chlamydia pneumoniae can infect the central nervous system via the olfactory and trigeminal nerves and contributes to Alzheimer’s disease risk (2022) · cites this paper as [30]
The Discussion identifies OECs as the main phagocytic cells of olfactory nerves, but describes their removal of axon debris, not microbes. The paper mentions trigeminal Schwann cells as possible contaminants of OEC preparations; it does not establish that they phagocytose microbes or that these glia eliminate most microbes reaching the nerves. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Feron, F., Perry, C., Cochrane, J., Licina, P., Nowitzke, A., Urquhart, S., Geraghty, T., Mackay-Sim, A., 2005. Autologous olfactory ensheathing cell transplantation in human spinal cord injury. Brain : a journal of neurology 128, 2951-2960.
- Granger, N., Blamires, H., Franklin, R.J., Jeffery, N.D., 2012. Autologous olfactory mucosal cell transplants in clinical spinal cord injury: a randomized double-blinded trial in a canine translational model. Brain : a journal of neurology 135, 3227-3237.
- Toft, A., Scott, D.T., Barnett, S.C., Riddell, J.S., 2007. Electrophysiological evidence that olfactory cell transplants improve function after spinal cord injury. Brain : a journal of neurology 130, 970-984.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chacko, A., Delbaz, A., Walkden, H., Basu, S., Armitage, C. W., Eindorf, T., Trim, L. K., Miller, E., West, N. P., St John, J. A., et al. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-06749-9 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Nazareth, L., Tello Velasquez, J., Lineburg, K. E., Chehrehasa, F., St John, J. A., & Ekberg, J. A. K.
- Affiliations
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute (AU)
- Griffith University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Ekberg, Jenny A.K.
- Venue
- Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 65
- Pages
- 92-101
- ISSN
- 1044-7431 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1948587042
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 1.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
- Funders
- Griffith University
- Australian Research Council (DP0986294)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nerve injury and regeneration
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
- Keywords
- olfactory ensheathing cells, accessory olfactory system, main olfactory system, phagocytosis, neural repair, olfactory bulb, axonal degeneration, pheromone detection
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Cells, Cultured, Neuroglia, Olfactory Nerve, Phagocytosis, Cell Transplantation, Mice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review