Cited by 118Memory and Neural MechanismsNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Conservation of neuronal number and size in the entorhinal cortex of behaviorally characterized aged rats

Merrill, David A., Chiba, Andrea A., Tuszynski, Mark H.·2001·Journal of Comparative Neurology

Abstract

Despite abundant evidence of behavioral and electrophysiological dysfunction of the rodent hippocampal formation with aging, the structural basis of age‐related cognitive decline remains unclear. Recently, unbiased stereological studies of the mammalian hippocampus have found little evidence to support the dogma that cellular loss accompanies hippocampal aging, thereby supporting an alternative hypothesis that aging is marked by widespread conservation of neuronal number. However, to date, the effects of aging have not been reported in another key component of memory systems in the rodent brain, the entorhinal cortex. In the present study, we stereologically estimated total neuronal number and size (cross‐sectional area and cell volume) in the subdivisions and cellular layers of the rat entorhinal cortex, using the optical fractionator and nucleator, respectively. Comparisons were made among Fischer 344 rats that were young, aged‐impaired, and aged‐unimpaired (based on functional analysis in the Morris water maze). No significant differences in cell number or size were observed in any of the entorhinal subdivisions or laminae examined in each group. Thus, aging is associated with widespread conservation of neuronal number, despite varying degrees of cognitive decline, in all memory‐related systems examined to date. These data suggest that mechanisms of age‐related cognitive decline are to be found in parameters other than neuronal number or size in the cortex of the mammalian brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 438:445–456, 2001. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cne.1327

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Merrill, D. A., Chiba, A. A., & Tuszynski, M. H.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Tuszynski, Mark H.
Venue
Journal of Comparative Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-09-04
Volume
438
Issue
4
Pages
445-456
ISSN
  • 0021-9967 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9861
OpenAlex
W2128340731
Cited by
118
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
2.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Comparative Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P01AG010435, AG05131, P50AG005131, AG10435)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM-07198, T32GM007198)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
entorhinal cortex, aging, neuron number, neuron size, cell volume, cross-sectional area, age-related cognitive decline, hippocampal aging, memory systems, F344 rats, Morris water maze, stereology
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Cell Count, Female, Memory Disorders, Nerve Degeneration, Neurons, Rats, Inbred F344, Cell Death, Entorhinal Cortex, Maze Learning, Cell Size, Rats

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