Cited by 253Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringNanopore and Nanochannel Transport StudiesAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques

Single-nanotube tracking reveals the nanoscale organization of the extracellular space in the live brain

Open access
Godin, Antoine G., Varela, Juan A., Gao, Zhenghong, Danné, Noémie, Dupuis, Julien P., Lounis, Brahim, Groc, Laurent, Cognet, Laurent·2017·Nature Nanotechnology

Abstract

The brain is a dynamic structure with the extracellular space (ECS) taking up almost a quarter of its volume. Signalling molecules, neurotransmitters and nutrients transit via the ECS, which constitutes a key microenvironment for cellular communication and the clearance of toxic metabolites. The spatial organization of the ECS varies during sleep, development and aging and is probably altered in neuropsychiatric and degenerative diseases, as inferred from electron microscopy and macroscopic biophysical investigations. Here we show an approach to directly observe the local ECS structures and rheology in brain tissue using super-resolution imaging. We inject single-walled carbon nanotubes into rat cerebroventricles and follow the near-infrared emission of individual nanotubes as they diffuse inside the ECS for tens of minutes in acute slices. Because of the interplay between the nanotube geometry and the ECS local environment, we can extract information about the dimensions and local viscosity of the ECS. We find a striking diversity of ECS dimensions down to 40 nm, and as well as of local viscosity values. Moreover, by chemically altering the extracellular matrix of the brains of live animals before nanotube injection, we reveal that the rheological properties of the ECS are affected, but these alterations are local and inhomogeneous at the nanoscale.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nnano.2016.248

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 253

Authors
Godin, A. G., Varela, J. A., Gao, Z., Danné, N., Dupuis, J. P., Lounis, B., Groc, L., & Cognet, L.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
  • Groc, Laurent
  • Cognet, Laurent
Venue
Nature Nanotechnology
Published
2016-11-21
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
238-243
ISSN
  • 1748-3387 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-3395
OpenAlex
W2553353231
Cited by
253
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 13
FWCI
9.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Nanotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Oskar-Bordeaux (Universite de Bordeaux) (submittedVersion)
  • St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-14-CE09-0018, ANR-15-CE16-0004, ANR-14-OHRI-0001)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Nanopore and Nanochannel Transport Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Advanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Keywords
extracellular space, brain microenvironment, single-walled carbon nanotubes, extracellular matrix, super-resolution imaging, rat brain slices
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Ventricles, Extracellular Space, Polyethylene Glycols, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Nanotubes, Carbon, Rats, Cellular Microenvironment, Optical Imaging

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