Comparative analysis of rodent lens morphometrics and biomechanical properties.

IF 0.9
Frontiers in ophthalmology Pub Date : 2025-04-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fopht.2025.1562583
Sepideh Cheheltani, Sadia T Islam, Heather Malino, Kalekidan Abera, Sandeep Aryal, Karen Forbes, Justin Parreno, Velia M Fowler
{"title":"Comparative analysis of rodent lens morphometrics and biomechanical properties.","authors":"Sepideh Cheheltani, Sadia T Islam, Heather Malino, Kalekidan Abera, Sandeep Aryal, Karen Forbes, Justin Parreno, Velia M Fowler","doi":"10.3389/fopht.2025.1562583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Proper ocular lens function requires biomechanical flexibility, which is reduced during aging. As increasing lens size has been shown to correlate with lens biomechanical stiffness in aging, we tested the hypothesis that whole lens size determines gross biomechanical stiffness by comparing lenses of varying sizes from three rodent species (mice, rats, and guinea pigs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Coverslip compression assay was performed to measure whole lens biomechanics. Whole mount staining on fixed lenses, followed by confocal microscopy, was conducted to measure lens microstructures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the three species, guinea pig lenses are the largest, rat lenses are smaller than guinea pig lenses, and mouse lenses are the smallest of the three. We found that rat and guinea pig lenses are stiffer than the much smaller mouse lenses. However, despite guinea pig lenses being larger than rat lenses, whole lens stiffness between guinea pigs and rats is not different. This refutes our hypothesis and indicates that lens size does not solely determine lens stiffness. We next compared lens microstructures, including nuclear size, capsule thickness, epithelial cell area, fiber cell widths, and suture organization between mice, rats, and guinea pigs. The lens nucleus is the largest in guinea pigs, followed by rats, and mice. However, the rat nucleus occupies a larger fraction of the lens. Both lens capsule thickness and fiber cell widths are the largest in guinea pigs, followed by mice and then rats. Epithelial cells are the largest in guinea pigs, and there are no differences between mice and rats. In addition, the lens suture shape appears similar across all three species.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Overall, our data indicates that whole lens size and microstructure morphometrics do not correlate with lens stiffness, indicating that factors contributing to lens biomechanics are complex and likely multifactorial.</p>","PeriodicalId":73096,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in ophthalmology","volume":"5 ","pages":"1562583"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12006193/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2025.1562583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Proper ocular lens function requires biomechanical flexibility, which is reduced during aging. As increasing lens size has been shown to correlate with lens biomechanical stiffness in aging, we tested the hypothesis that whole lens size determines gross biomechanical stiffness by comparing lenses of varying sizes from three rodent species (mice, rats, and guinea pigs).

Methods: Coverslip compression assay was performed to measure whole lens biomechanics. Whole mount staining on fixed lenses, followed by confocal microscopy, was conducted to measure lens microstructures.

Results: Among the three species, guinea pig lenses are the largest, rat lenses are smaller than guinea pig lenses, and mouse lenses are the smallest of the three. We found that rat and guinea pig lenses are stiffer than the much smaller mouse lenses. However, despite guinea pig lenses being larger than rat lenses, whole lens stiffness between guinea pigs and rats is not different. This refutes our hypothesis and indicates that lens size does not solely determine lens stiffness. We next compared lens microstructures, including nuclear size, capsule thickness, epithelial cell area, fiber cell widths, and suture organization between mice, rats, and guinea pigs. The lens nucleus is the largest in guinea pigs, followed by rats, and mice. However, the rat nucleus occupies a larger fraction of the lens. Both lens capsule thickness and fiber cell widths are the largest in guinea pigs, followed by mice and then rats. Epithelial cells are the largest in guinea pigs, and there are no differences between mice and rats. In addition, the lens suture shape appears similar across all three species.

Discussion: Overall, our data indicates that whole lens size and microstructure morphometrics do not correlate with lens stiffness, indicating that factors contributing to lens biomechanics are complex and likely multifactorial.

啮齿类动物晶状体形态计量学与生物力学性能的比较分析。
适当的晶状体功能需要生物力学的灵活性,而随着年龄的增长,这种灵活性会降低。由于晶状体尺寸的增加已被证明与衰老过程中晶状体的生物力学刚度相关,我们通过比较三种啮齿类动物(小鼠、大鼠和豚鼠)不同尺寸的晶状体,验证了整个晶状体尺寸决定总生物力学刚度的假设。方法:采用盖唇压缩法测定全晶状体生物力学。在固定镜片上进行全片染色,然后用共聚焦显微镜测量镜片的显微结构。结果:三种晶状体中,豚鼠晶状体最大,大鼠晶状体小于豚鼠晶状体,小鼠晶状体最小。我们发现大鼠和豚鼠的晶状体比小得多的小鼠晶状体更硬。然而,尽管豚鼠的晶状体比大鼠的晶状体大,但豚鼠和大鼠的晶状体整体硬度并无差异。这反驳了我们的假设,并表明透镜尺寸并不完全决定透镜刚度。接下来,我们比较了小鼠、大鼠和豚鼠的晶状体微结构,包括核大小、被囊厚度、上皮细胞面积、纤维细胞宽度和缝合线组织。豚鼠的晶状体核最大,其次是大鼠和小鼠。然而,大鼠核占据晶状体的较大比例。豚鼠的晶状体囊厚度和纤维细胞宽度最大,其次是小鼠和大鼠。上皮细胞在豚鼠中最大,小鼠和大鼠之间没有差异。此外,这三个物种的晶状体缝线形状相似。讨论:总的来说,我们的数据表明晶状体的整体尺寸和微观结构形态与晶状体刚度无关,这表明影响晶状体生物力学的因素是复杂的,可能是多因素的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信