The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Continuous infusion of nerve growth factor prevents basal forebrain neuronal death after fimbria fornix transection.
Open accessAbstract
Neurons in the rat medial septum (MS) and vertical limb of the diagonal band of Broca (VDB) undergo a rapid and severe cell death after transection of their dorsal projection to the hippocampus by aspiration of the ipsilateral fimbria fornix and supracallosal striae. By 2 weeks posttransection, the extent of neuronal loss was 50% of the total neurons and 70% of the cholinergic neurons in the MS and 30% of the total neurons and 40% of the cholinergic neurons in the VDB. We hypothesized that (i) the death was due to the loss of a hippocampus-derived neuronotrophic factor, and (ii) exogenous nerve growth factor (NGF) might provide trophic support to the MS/VDB cholinergic neurons, in light of recent reports that the septal diagonal band cholinergic neurons are responsive to NGF and that NGF is present and produced in the hippocampus. In the present study, we attempted to prevent the transection-induced neuronal death by continuous infusion of exogenous 7S NGF (1 microgram/wk) through an intraventricular cannula device. We report here that NGF treatment significantly reduces both the total neuronal and cholinergic neuronal death found 2 weeks after fimbria fornix transection; there was a sparing of 50% of the neurons in the MS and essentially 100% of those in the VDB that otherwise would have died. We conclude that NGF also has a protective effect on noncholinergic neurons since calculations indicate that 80% of the NGF-affected neurons are noncholinergic.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The cholinergic hypothesis of geriatric memory dysfunction
Bartus, R. T., Dean, R. L., Beer, B., & Lippa, A. S. (1982) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7046051 · Cited by 5,545
Alzheimer's Disease and Senile Dementia: Loss of Neurons in the Basal Forebrain
Whitehouse, P., Price, D., Struble, R., Clark, A., Coyle, J., & DeLong, M. R. (1982) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7058341 · Cited by 3,627
Cited by
Neurotrophins and their receptors: A convergence point for many signalling pathways
Chao, M. V. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1078 · Cited by 2,298
Trophic factors and neuronal survival
Barde, Y.-A. (1989) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/0896-6273(89)90040-8 · Cited by 1,625
Nerve Growth Factor Signaling, Neuroprotection, and Neural Repair
Sofroniew, M. V., Howe, C. L., & Mobley, W. C. (2001) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.1217 · Cited by 1,284
The cholinergic system in aging and neuronal degeneration
Schliebs, R., & Arendt, T. (2011) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2010.11.058 · Cited by 1,047
GDNF, NGF and BDNF as Therapeutic Options for Neurodegeneration
Allen, S. J., Watson, J. J., Shoemark, D. K., Barua, N. U., & Patel, N. K. (2013) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2013.01.004 · Cited by 820
Metadata
- Authors
- Williams, L. R., Varon, S., Peterson, G. M., Wictorin, K., Fischer, W., Bjorklund, A., & Gage, F. H.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1986-12
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 9231-9235
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2045776001
- Cited by
- 1,055
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Continuous infusion of nerve growth factor prevents basal forebrain neuronal death after fimbria fornix transection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.83.23.9231
- The paper
- Williams, L. R., Varon, S., Peterson, G. M., Wictorin, K., Fischer, W., Bjorklund, A., & Gage, F. H. (1986). Continuous infusion of nerve growth factor prevents basal forebrain neuronal death after fimbria fornix transection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.23.9231
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.