Sex and species differences in mouse and rat forebrain commissures depend on the method of adjusting for brain size
Open accessAbstract
Sex differences in the forebrain commissures (corpus callosum, hippocampal commissure, and anterior commissure) were examined in B6D2F2 hybrid mice and Sprague-Dawley rats. Twenty-four male-female littermate pairs of mice were perfused at each of 21, 42 and 63 days of age and the midsagittal area of the commissures was measured from en bloc stained tissue. Twenty-two male-female littermate pairs of rats were examined at 110 days of age using the same methods. Male mice had larger bodies than females but no sex differences were found for mouse brain weight or commissure areas. In contrast, a significant sex difference was found for rat body, brain, corpus callosum and hippocampal commissure sizes. Four methods were used to adjust for differences in brain size (ratio, geometric, linear regression, and allometric). When the two species were analysed separately, neither mice nor rats showed significant sex differences in commissure areas relative to brain size if regression or allometric adjustments were made. Even when data from mice and rats were combined into one large group with a wide range of values, no species or sex differences were apparent after adjustments were made for brain size with either the regression or allometric methods. The use of ratios to adjust for differences in overall size is not recommended, especially because this method does not effectively remove the influence of brain size from commissure size; a substantial correlation is often present between the ratio and brain size.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Data published by Bishop and Walsten indicate that unlike in humans or rats, mice do not display a gender difference in corpus callosum size.
“Although the size of the corpus callosum was not measured here, data published by Bishop and Walsten (6) indicate that unlike in humans or rats, mice do not display a gender difference in corpus callosum size.”
From SJL Mice Exposed to Cuprizone Intoxication Reveal Strain and Gender Pattern Differences in Demyelination (2009) · cites this paper as Bishop and Walsten (6)
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- w18x H.J. Jerison, Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence, Academic Press, New York, 1973.
- P.D. MacLean, Fiber systems of the forebrain, in: G. Paxinos (Ed.), The Rat Nervous System, Vol. 1, Forebrain and Midbrain, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1985, pp. 417-440.
- G.C. Packard, T.J. Boardman, The misuse of ratios to scale physiological data that vary allometrically with body size, in: M.E. Feder, A.F. Bennett, W.W. Burggren, R.B. Huey (Eds.), New Directions in Ecological Physiology, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, Eng-land, 1987, pp. 216-239.
- W.S. Zamenhof, E. van Marthens, H. Bursztyn, The effect of hormones on DNA synthesis and cell number in the developing chick and rat brain, in: M. Hamburgh, E.J.W. Barrington (Eds.), Hormones and Development, Appleton, New York, 1971, pp. 101-119.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wahlsten, D., Metten, P., & Crabbe, J. C. (2003) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/s0006-8993(03)02354-0 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Taylor, L. C., Gilmore, W., & Matsushima, G. K. (2009) · Brain Pathology · doi:10.1111/j.1750-3639.2008.00230.x · Cited by 84 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bishop, K. M., & Wahlsten, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Venue
- Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-01
- Volume
- 815
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 358-366
- ISSN
- 0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017053128
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- libres.uncg.edu
- Locations
- Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Sex and Gender in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anatomy › Medical and Biological Sciences
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Sexual Differentiation and Disorders
- Keywords
- sex differences, species differences, corpus callosum, hippocampal commissure, anterior commissure, allometry, regression adjustment, brain structure, mice, rats
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Body Constitution, Corpus Callosum, Crosses, Genetic, Female, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mice, Inbred DBA, Organ Size, Regression Analysis, Sex Characteristics, Species Specificity, Prosencephalon, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Mice, 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