Save
Email
Print
ShareJune 30, 2010 — Babies born to women who do not consume enough folic acid (sometimes referred to as folate or vitamin B9) are at high risk of developing neural tube defects (i.e., defects in the development of the spinal cord or brain). This is the reason underlying the recommendation that women who are pregnant take a folic acid supplement.
A team of researchers, led by Bermans Iskandar, at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, has now generated data in rodents suggesting that folic acid might also help promote healing in injured brain and spinal cord.
Specifically, the team was able to uncover a molecular pathway by which folate can promote nerve cell regeneration following injury in rodents.
In an accompanying commentary, Matthias Endres and Golo Kronenberg, at Charité -- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany, discuss how these data, together with the safety and simplicity of folate supplementation, provide a rationale for testing whether folate supplementation is beneficial for patients with spinal cord and brain trauma.
The research appears in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.
Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:
Story Source:
The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Journal of Clinical Investigation, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.
Journal References:
- bermans J. Iskandar, Elias Rizk, Brenton Meier, Nithya Hariharan, Teodoro Bottiglieri, Richard H. Finnell, David F. Jarrard, Ruma V. Banerjee, J.h. Pate Skene, Aaron Nelson, Nirav Patel, Carmen Gherasim, Kathleen Simon, Thomas D. Cook and Kirk J. Hogan. Folate regulation of axonal regeneration in the rodent central nervous system through DNA methylation. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2010; DOI: 10.1172/JCI40000
- golo Kronenberg, and Matthias Endres. Neuronal injury: folate to the rescue? Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2010; DOI: 10.1172/JCI40764
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
more 
