4.5 Article

Stereological estimation of Purkinje neuron number in C57BL/6 mice and its relation to associative learning

Journal

NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 141, Issue 1, Pages 233-243

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2006.03.070

Keywords

cerebellum; optical fractionator; normal aging; delay eyeblink classical conditioning; age-related hearing loss

Categories

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [R01AG021925, R01AG023742, R03AG019411] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG23742, AG21925, AG19411] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cerebellar Purkinje neurons are among the most vulnerable neurons in the CNS. Impairment in Purkinje neurons has consequences for cerebellar cortical-dependent forms of behavior. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate Purkinje neuron number over the lifespan of C57BL/6 mice. Stereological estimates of the total number of Purkinje neurons in cerebellar cortex were made in 25 C5713L/6 mice aged 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months. Delay eye-blink classical conditioning to a white noise conditioned stimulus was also assessed,for 10 daily sessions. Statistically significant age differences in Purkinje neuron number were observed beginning at 18 months. Delay eyeblink conditioning also showed significant age-related impairment, at least some of which resulted from age-related deficits in hearing. Eliminating the hearing-impaired 18- and 24-month-old mice from the analysis, the correlation between Purkinje neuron number and rate of conditioning was -0.435 (P= 0.053) in 15 younger mice aged 4-12 months. Purkinje neurons are one of the few types of neurons showing significant age-associated loss. Results indicate that individual variation in Purkinje neuron number is related to eyeblink conditioning in young organisms suggesting that reserves of neuron numbers against which individuals draw are defined early in life. (c) 2006 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available