1986
DOI: 10.1016/0165-0270(86)90113-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A critical evaluation of methods for estimating the numerical density of synapses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, with regard to synapse size, we found no difference in the mean length of synaptic transects with estradiol treatment; the difference in synapse density calculated with a "conventional" formula was clearly due to a greater number of synaptic profiles observed in estradiol-treated compared to control animals. Further, we observed very similar estradiol-mediated differences in synapse density using the Disector method, which is not biased by differences in the shape, size, or orientation of the test objects subjected to analysis (Sterio, 1984;DeGroot and Bierman, 1986). Second, it seems unlikely that estradiol is affecting dendritic arborization, as we have recently obtained evidence that parameters such as number of apical dendritic branch points and total apical dendritic length in CA 1 pyramidal cells are not changed by estradiol treatment (C. S. Woolley and B. S. McEwen, unpublished observations).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…First, with regard to synapse size, we found no difference in the mean length of synaptic transects with estradiol treatment; the difference in synapse density calculated with a "conventional" formula was clearly due to a greater number of synaptic profiles observed in estradiol-treated compared to control animals. Further, we observed very similar estradiol-mediated differences in synapse density using the Disector method, which is not biased by differences in the shape, size, or orientation of the test objects subjected to analysis (Sterio, 1984;DeGroot and Bierman, 1986). Second, it seems unlikely that estradiol is affecting dendritic arborization, as we have recently obtained evidence that parameters such as number of apical dendritic branch points and total apical dendritic length in CA 1 pyramidal cells are not changed by estradiol treatment (C. S. Woolley and B. S. McEwen, unpublished observations).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…In two experiments, synapse density in ovariectomized rats treated with either estradiol or oil vehicle was evaluated using, in the first case, a "conventional" estimation procedure based upon large numbers of randomly taken, area-weighted micrographs (Beaulieu and Colonnier, 1985) or, in the second case, the Disector method (Sterio, 1984;DeGroot and Bierman, 1986). The "conventional" estimation procedures are generally considered to be inferior to the Disector method (DeGroot and Bierman, 1986; but see Calverley et al, 1988) because the "conventional" techniques rely on the assumption that synaptic junctions are circular, disk-shaped structures, which they almost certainly are not (Harris and Stevens, 1989). The Disector method, on the other hand, is unbiased by the size, shape, or orientation of the test objects, in this case synapses, under study.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Designed to convert profile counts made in two-dimensional images of sections into the number of three-dimensional objects, these techniques rely on assumptions about the size, shape and orientation of objects. Most assumptions made with regard to synapses were unrealistic (e.g., synaptic contacts were assumed to fit the model of flat circular discs having the same diameter) which resulted in biases (De Groot, 1986). The effects of these potential biases on the results of synapse counts are difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate in practice.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, this bias in estimating numerical density may change between experimental groups. New counting procedures such as the "disector" (Sterio, 1984;Gundersen, 1988) make no assumptions about the shape of synapses (i.e., they are said to be unbiased) and permit a more sensitive means of estimating subtle changes in synapse number (Braendgaard and Gundersen, 1986) independent of concurrent shape alterations (De Groot and Bierman, 1986;Calverley et al, 1988).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%