Search

The integration of smart IT devices and biochemical assays with optical biosensing technology facilitates the development of efficacious optical biosensors for many practical diagnostic fields, owing to their minimized use of high-technical electronic components and simple operation. Herein, we introduced a simple optical biosensing system based on the specific wavelength filtering principle and count-based analysis method. The developed system uses a smartphone with a paper-based signal guide and a biosensing channel. The paper-based signal guide was prepared by printing red patterns of various brightness on a black background. Given that a blue product is generated as a result of horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-based enzymatic reaction in the biosensing channel, the channel could be used as a blue filter that absorbs red light. When red light reflected from the red pattern is absorbed by the channel, the pattern appears black. As such, the color of the patterns is assimilated with the black background, so it seems to disappear. Consequently, the amount of blue product relative to the concentration of the target analyte can be measured by counting the number of observed patterns on the paper-based signal guide. In this study, the concentration of urinary C-telopeptide fragment of type II collagen (uCTX-II, 0–10 ng/mL) was measured using the developed system without complicated equipment. In addition, the quantitative analysis of uCTX-II in the real urine sample was successfully performed. Therefore, we expect that the developed optical transducing system could be practically used for point-of-care testing (POCT) diagnosis under resource-limited environmental conditions.

The collagen 2.3 and 3.6 promoters have been used to drive Cre expression for generation of conditional transgenic mutant mice. Within the bone, Col3.6 is expressed by mesenchymal precursor cells and their downstream progeny, while Col2.3 is more osteoblast specific. Our generation of transgenic mice with Col2.3-Cre- and Col3.6-Cre-driven deletion of the long-form leptin receptor (ObRb) necessitated a thorough analysis of the nonspecific expression of these promoters in the central nervous system. Both Col2.3 and Col3.6 were capable of forcing loxP recombination in the brain as demonstrated by EGFP expression in ROSA reporter mice. Expression of Col2.3 was limited to the central base of the brain near the third ventricle. In contrast, robust expression of Col3.6 was noted throughout the brain, centering near the distal third ventricle, third ventricle, and aqueduct. We subsequently analyzed the colocalization of leptin-responsive P-Stat3 neurons with Col3.6-expressing neurons. Approximately 5–10% colocalization was noted in leptin-responsive brain areas such as the arcuate nucleus, dorsal medial hypothalamus, ventral premammillary nucleus, and lateral hypothalamus. Injection of 3.6Cre+F/F ObRb knockout mice with leptin confirmed the presence of an intact P-Stat3 response that was dampened in the lateral hypothalamus (p < 0.050). This test was done to explore the contribution of neural leptin signaling to the bone phenotype of the 3.6Cre+F/F mice. Our analysis indicates that neural ObRb deletion, while present, is likely not the sole driver of femoral changes through traditional sympathetic circuits.

This study was undertaken to determine whether periosteum from different bone sources in a donor results in the same formation of bone and cartilage. In this case, periosteum obtained from the cranium and mandible (examples of tissue supporting intramembranous ossification) and the radius and ilium (examples of tissues supporting endochondral ossification) of individual calves was used to produce tissue-engineered constructs that were implanted in nude mice and then retrieved after 10 and 20 weeks. Specimens were compared in terms of their osteogenic and chondrogenic potential by radiography, histology, and gene expression levels. By 10 weeks of implantation and more so by 20 weeks, constructs with cranial periosteum had developed to the greatest extent, followed in order by ilium, radius, and mandible periosteum. All constructs, particularly with cranial tissue although minimally with mandibular periosteum, had mineralized by 10 weeks on radiography and stained for proteoglycans with safranin-O red (cranial tissue most intensely and mandibular tissue least intensely). Gene expression of type I collagen, type II collagen, runx2, and bone sialoprotein (BSP) was detectable on QRT-PCR for all specimens at 10 and 20 weeks. By 20 weeks, the relative gene levels were: type I collagen, ilium >> radial ≧ cranial ≧ mandibular; type II collagen, radial > ilium > cranial ≧ mandibular; runx2, cranial >>> radial > mandibular ≧ ilium; and BSP, ilium ≧ radial > cranial > mandibular. These data demonstrate that the osteogenic and chondrogenic capacity of the various constructs is not identical and depends on the periosteal source regardless of intramembranous or endochondral ossification. Based on these results, cranial and mandibular periosteal tissues appear to enhance bone formation most and least prominently, respectively. The appropriate periosteal choice for bone and cartilage tissue engineering and regeneration should be a function of its immediate application as well as other factors besides growth rate.