Abstract
Neuron and synapse numbers are important assays in neuroscience. These numbers are estimated by one of four methods: 1) profile counts, 2) assumption-based methods, 3) serial reconstructions, and 4) stereological methods. The criteria for these methods are diverse. This creates a disparity in that some reviewers accept estimates from any of these methods, while others accept only specific methods. An equally important issue is the diversity of sampling strategies, since unbiased estimates of neuronal or synaptic numbers are contingent upon both counting and sampling techniques. The purpose of this commentary is to institute a dialog that will lead to a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the above methods, and to propose guidelines that should lead to more uniform and thus fairer judging of the studies that provide estimates of neuron or synapse numbers. In addition, adoption of more uniform standards for obtaining unbiased numerical estimates should result in the generation of an unbiased database that will be of considerable use in future studies.
Keywords
Sampling (signal processing)BiologyDiversity (politics)Dialog boxSynapseNeuronStrengths and weaknessesStatisticsNeuroscienceComputer scienceMathematicsPsychologyTelecommunications
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Improving the accuracy of two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization: moving beyond the NOME assumption
Abstract Background Two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization (MR) incorporating multiple genetic variants within a meta-analysis framework is a popular technique for asse...
Demystifying the <scp>RAD</scp> fad
We are writing in response to the population and phylogenomics meeting review by Andrews & Luikart ( ) entitled ‘Recent novel approaches for population genomics data analysi...
Experience-Induced Neurogenesis in the Senescent Dentate Gyrus
We demonstrate here that under physiological conditions neurogenesis continues to occur in the dentate gyrus of senescent mice and can be stimulated by living in an enriched env...
Stereology for anisotropic cells: Application to growth cartilage*
SUMMARY A number of either new or recently available stereological methods are described for estimating volume, surface area and number of anisotropic cells. The methods are ill...
Assessing Kidney Function — Measured and Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate
In the coming years, estimates of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) may replace the measurement of serum creatinine as the primary tool for the assessment of kidney function....
Publication Info
- Year
- 1996
- Type
- review
- Volume
- 364
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 6-15
- Citations
- 974
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
974
OpenAlex
Cite This
Richard E. Coggeshall,
Helena A. Lekan
(1996).
Methods for determining numbers of cells and synapses: A case for more uniform standards of review.
The Journal of Comparative Neurology
, 364
(1)
, 6-15.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19960101)364:1<6::aid-cne2>3.0.co;2-9
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19960101)364:1<6::aid-cne2>3.0.co;2-9