Cited by 79Retinal Development and DisordersRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsCellular transport and secretion

Noncell-autonomous photoreceptor degeneration in a zebrafish model of choroideremia

Open access
Krock, Bryan L., Bilotta, Joseph, Perkins, Brian D.·2007·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Choroideremia is an X-linked hereditary retinal degeneration resulting from mutations in the Rab escort protein-1 (REP1). The Rep1 protein facilitates posttranslational modification of Rab proteins, which regulate intracellular trafficking in the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and photoreceptors and are likely involved in the removal of outer segment disk membranes by the RPE. A critical question for potential treatment of choroideremia is whether photoreceptor degeneration results from autonomous defects in opsin transport within the photoreceptor or as a nonautonomous and secondary consequence of RPE degeneration. To address this question, we have characterized the retinal pathology in zebrafish rep1 mutants, which carry a recessive nonsense mutation in the REP1 gene. Zebrafish rep1 mutants exhibit degeneration of the RPE and photoreceptors and complete loss of visual function as measured by electroretinograms. In the mutant RPE, photoreceptor outer segment material was not effectively eliminated, and large vacuoles were observed. However, opsin trafficking in photoreceptors occurred normally. Mosaic analysis revealed that photoreceptor degeneration was nonautonomous and required contact with the mutant RPE as mutant photoreceptors were rescued in wild-type hosts and wild-type photoreceptors degenerated in mutant hosts. We conclude that mutations in REP1 disrupt cellular processes in the RPE, which causes photoreceptor death as a secondary consequence. These results suggest that therapies that correct the RPE may successfully rescue photoreceptor loss in choroideremia.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0605818104

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. [1]Cremers FP, Sankila EM, Brunsmann F, Jay M, Jay B, Wright A, Pinckers AJ, Schwartz M, van de Pol DJ, Wieringa B, et al. Am J Hum Genet. 1990;47:622–628. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [5]Cremers FP, Armstrong SA, Seabra MC, Brown MS, Goldstein JL. J Biol Chem. 1994;269:2111–2117. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [21]Flannery JG, Bird AC, Farber DB, Weleber RG, Bok D. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci. 1990;31:229–236. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. [25]Kolb H, Gouras P. Invest Ophthalmol. 1974;13:487–498. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. [28]Sung CH, Davenport CM, Nathans J. J Biol Chem. 1993;268:26645–26649. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. [29]Nir I, Papermaster DS. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1989;314:251–264. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. [33]Furuta Y, Lagutin O, Hogan BL, Oliver GC. Genesis. 2000;26:130–132. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. [35]Westerfield M. The Zebrafish Book. Eugene, OR: Univ of Oregon Press; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  9. [36]Schmitt EA, Dowling JE. J Comp Neurol. 1999;404:515–536. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. [37]Fadool JM, Fadool DA, Moore JC, Linser PJ. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci. 1999;40(Suppl):1251. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krock, B. L., Bilotta, J., & Perkins, B. D.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Western Kentucky University (US)
Corresponding author
Perkins, Brian D.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2007-03-13
Volume
104
Issue
11
Pages
4600-4605
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2032100272
Cited by
79
References
41
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OakTrust (Texas A&M University Libraries) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Notre Dame
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Center for Research Resources (P20RR016481)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular transport and secretion
Keywords
choroideremia, REP1, Rab escort protein 1, photoreceptor degeneration, retinal pigment epithelium degeneration, Rab GTPases, mosaic analysis, X-linked retinal degeneration, retinal degeneration treatment
MeSH terms
Alleles, Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Electroretinography, Models, Biological, Mosaicism, Mutation, Pigment Epithelium of Eye, Retinal Degeneration, Time Factors, Zebrafish, Choroideremia, Rod Opsins, Photoreceptor Cells, Vertebrate, Microscopy, Electron, Transmission

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