Hindered diffusion of high molecular weight compounds in brain extracellular microenvironment measured with integrative optical imaging
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes the theory of an integrative optical imaging system and its application to the analysis of the diffusion of 3-, 10-, 40-, and 70-kDa fluorescent dextran molecules in agarose gel and brain extracellular microenvironment. The method uses a precisely defined source of fluorescent molecules pressure ejected from a micropipette, and a detailed theory of the intensity contributions from out-of-focus molecules in a three-dimensional medium to a two-dimensional image. Dextrans tagged with either tetramethylrhodamine or Texas Red were ejected into 0.3% agarose gel or rat cortical slices maintained in a perfused chamber at 34 degrees C and imaged using a compound epifluorescent microscope with a 10 x water-immersion objective. About 20 images were taken at 2-10-s intervals, recorded with a cooled CCD camera, then transferred to a 486 PC for quantitative analysis. The diffusion coefficient in agarose gel, D, and the apparent diffusion coefficient, D*, in brain tissue were determined by fitting an integral expression relating the measured two-dimensional image intensity to the theoretical three-dimensional dextran concentration. The measurements in dilute agarose gel provided a reference value of D and validated the method. Values of the tortuosity, lambda = (D/D*)1/2, for the 3- and 10-kDa dextrans were 1.70 and 1.63, respectively, which were consistent with previous values derived from tetramethylammonium measurements in cortex. Tortuosities for the 40- and 70-kDa dextrans had significantly larger values of 2.16 and 2.25, respectively. This suggests that the extracellular space may have local constrictions that hinder the diffusion of molecules above a critical size that lies in the range of many neurotrophic compounds.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The hydraulic diameter of gadobutrol is not expected to exceed 2.6 nm.
“Hydraulic diameter of gadobutrol is therefore not expected to exceed this”
From Brain-wide glymphatic enhancement and clearance in humans assessed with MRI. (2018) · cites this paper as [30]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 40 · Cited by 266
- Authors
- Nicholson, C., & Tao, L.
- Affiliations
- NYU Langone Health (US)
- ORCID
- Nicholson, C.
- Venue
- Biophysical Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-12
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2277-2290
- ISSN
- 0006-3495 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC1225970
- OpenAlex
- W2059860021
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Biophysical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS-28642, R01NS028642)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Advanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
- Keywords
- hindered diffusion, brain extracellular space, fluorescent dextran, agarose gel, diffusion coefficient, tortuosity, apparent diffusion coefficient, tetramethylrhodamine, Texas Red, molecular size dependence
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biopolymers, Brain, Cerebral Cortex, Dextrans, Diffusion, Extracellular Space, Female, Male, Mathematics, Microscopy, Fluorescence, Models, Neurological, Models, Theoretical, Molecular Weight, Sepharose, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats
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