CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurological disorders and treatmentsMedical and Biological Sciences

Stability of large cell-medium cell clusters in the mature neostriatum

Mensah, P.L.·1982·Experimental Brain Research
DOI 10.1007/bf00235886
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Large neurons of the mouse caudate nucleus contain profuse Nissl material, have a maximal pole-to-pole diameter of up to 25 micron, occur preferentially within a central or CORE zone of the neostriatum, and are almost always located within territories delimited by medium-sized clustered neurons. Examination of coronal sections taken through the head of the nucleus and stained with cresyl violet revealed the absence of age-related pathology as evaluated by three parameters: (1) there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of large neurons in all areas of the head of the nucleus; (2) the large neuron continued to be confined preferentially to the CORE zone of the head of the nucleus throughout the time period studied; and (3) no statistically significant shifts were detected in the geometry of large cell-medium cell clusters. Since postnatal age did not significantly affect the frequency, distribution or geometry of large cell-medium cell clusters, data from all animals was combined. This information was used to evaluate the possibility of an interaction between location within or outside the CORE zone and type of large cell-medium cell cluster, but these results were not statistically significant. Therefore, the data analyzed in this study support the view that the geometry of large cell-medium cell clusters is extremely stable in the mouse neostriatum and seems not to be influenced either by age of the animal or by location of the cell grouping.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00235886

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • The striatum, cortex, and hippocampus stably maintain their size and neuronal numbers throughout adulthood, contrasting with cerebellar neuronal loss.

    “The loss of neurons in the cerebellum contrasts with that of other brain structures, such as the striatum, cortex, and hippocampus, which stably maintain their size and neuronal numbers throughout adulthood3,5.”

    From Epigenetic regulation of brain region-specific microglia clearance activity (2018) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mensah, P. L.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Mensah, P.L.
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1982-07
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
57-60
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
DOI
10.1007/bf00235886
OpenAlex
W2076154344
Cited by
7
References
31
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (2s07rr005356-30)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anatomy › Medical and Biological Sciences
Keywords
large neurons, cell clusters, neostriatum, caudate nucleus, core area, age-related changes, postnatal development, mouse brain
MeSH terms
Aging, Animals, Cell Count, Corpus Striatum, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Neurons, Mice

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