Cited by 2,132Neonatal and fetal brain pathologyNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances

Brain development in rodents and humans: identifying benchmarks of maturation and vulnerability to injury across species

Open access
Semple, Bridgette D., Blomgren, Klas, Gimlin, Kayleen, Ferriero, Donna M., Noble-Haeusslein, Linda J.·2013·Progress in Neurobiology

Abstract

Hypoxic-ischemic and traumatic brain injuries are leading causes of long-term mortality and disability in infants and children. Although several preclinical models using rodents of different ages have been developed, species differences in the timing of key brain maturation events can render comparisons of vulnerability and regenerative capacities difficult to interpret. Traditional models of developmental brain injury have utilized rodents at postnatal day 7-10 as being roughly equivalent to a term human infant, based historically on the measurement of post-mortem brain weights during the 1970s. Here we will examine fundamental brain development processes that occur in both rodents and humans, to delineate a comparable time course of postnatal brain development across species. We consider the timing of neurogenesis, synaptogenesis, gliogenesis, oligodendrocyte maturation and age-dependent behaviors that coincide with developmentally regulated molecular and biochemical changes. In general, while the time scale is considerably different, the sequence of key events in brain maturation is largely consistent between humans and rodents. Further, there are distinct parallels in regional vulnerability as well as functional consequences in response to brain injuries. With a focus on developmental hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy and traumatic brain injury, this review offers guidelines for researchers when considering the most appropriate rodent age for the developmental stage or process of interest to approximate human brain development.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.04.001

Cites

252 of 252 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 CNS shows regionally and temporally distinct vulnerability to various diseases and insults.

    “the CNS exhibits regionally and temporally distinct patterns of vulnerability to various diseases and insults (Figure 2) (Kessler et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2014; Semple et al., 2013; Tebbenkamp et al., 2014).”
  • Human brain development is protracted compared with other species, so despite having a more mature brain at birth than rats, humans remain vulnerable to insult.

    “development of the human brain is protracted compared to other species (Clancy et al., 2001; Miller et al, 2012; Semple et al., 2013), so despite having a more “mature” brain at birth compared to rats, vulnerability to insult remains.”

    From The effects of early life stress on reward processing (2018) · cites this paper as Semple et al., 2013

  • The age at which maternal separation occurs in most animal experiments corresponds to a gestational age in humans for some aspects of brain development.

    “the age at which maternal separation occurs in most animal experiments corresponds to a gestational age in humans, at least in terms of some aspects of brain development (Semple et al., 2013).”

    From The effects of early life stress on reward processing (2018) · cites this paper as Semple et al., 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Blaesse P Airaksinen MS Rivera C Kaila K 2009 Cationchloride cotransporters and neuronal function Neuron 61 820 838 19323993
  2. DeSesso JM Scialli AR Holson JF 1999 Apparent lability of neural tube closure in laboratory animals and humans American Journal of Medical Genetics A 87 143 162 10533029
  3. Glantz L Gilmore JH Hamer RM Lieberman JA Jarskog LF 2007 Synaptophysin and postsynaptic density protein 95inthe human prefrontal cortex from mid-gestation into early childhood Neuroscience 149 582 591 17916412 PMC2128709
  4. Huang Z Liu J Cheung PY Chen C 2009b Long-term cognitive impairment and myelination deficiency in a rat model of perinatal hypoxic-ischemic brain injury Brain Research 1301 100 109 19747899
  5. Inder TE Huppi PS 2000 In vivo studies of brain development by magnetic resonance techniques Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 6 59 67 10899798
  6. Lee J Croen LA Lindan C Nash KB Yoshida CK 2005 Annals of Neurology 58 2
  7. Micheva KD Beaulieu C 1996 Quantitative aspects of synaptogenesis in the rat barrel field cortex with special reference to GABA circuitry Journal of Comparative Neurology 373 340 354 8889932
  8. Prins ML 2008 Cerebral metabolic adaption and keton metabolism after brain injury JCBFM 28 1 16 PMC2857668 17684514
  9. Volpe JJ 2000 Overview: normal and abnormal human brain development Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 6 1 5 10899791
  10. Yager JY Ashwal S 2009 Animal models of perinatal hypoxicischemic brain damage Pediatric Neurology 40 156 167 19218028
  11. Yuan W Holland SK Schmithorst VJ Walz NC Cecil KM 2007 AJNR American Journal of Neuroradiology 28 10 PMC4295209 17905895
  12. Zhang ZW 2006 Postnatal development of the mammalian neocortex: Role of activity revisited Canadian Journal of Neurological Science 33 158 169 16736724

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Semple, B. D., Blomgren, K., Gimlin, K., Ferriero, D. M., & Noble-Haeusslein, L. J.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Semple, Bridgette D.
Venue
Progress in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-07
Volume
106-107
Pages
1-16
ISSN
0301-0082 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2027917639
Cited by
2,132
References
252
Citations by year
2026: 156 · 2025: 210 · 2024: 211 · 2023: 212 · 2022: 219 · 2021: 241 · 2020: 213 · 2019: 203 · 2018: 164 · 2017: 128 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 9
FWCI
8.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Progress in Neurobiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ns077767-02)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (#R01NS077767, R01NS050159, NS077767)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Keywords
brain development, developmental brain injury, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, traumatic brain injury, rodent models, postnatal development, neurogenesis, synaptogenesis, gliogenesis, oligodendrocyte maturation, species differences, developmental vulnerability, preclinical models
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Brain Injuries, Humans, Oligodendroglia, Rodentia, Hypoxia-Ischemia, Brain, Neurogenesis

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