4.2 Article

Compartmentation of the cerebellar cortex of hummingbirds (Aves: Trochilidae) revealed by the expression of zebrin II and phospholipase C beta 4

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL NEUROANATOMY
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 55-63

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2008.10.001

关键词

Cerebellum; Purkinje cell; Immunohistochemistry; Evolution; Comparative anatomy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The parasagittal organization of the mammalian cerebellar cortex into zones has been well characterized by immunohistochemical, hodological and physiological studies in recent years. The pattern of these parasagittal bands across the cerebellum is highly conserved across mammals, but whhether a similar conservation of immunohistochemically defined parasagittal bands occurs within birds has remained uncertain. Here, we examine the compartmentation of the cerebellar cortex of a group of birds with unique cerebellar morphology-hummingbirds (Trochilidae). Immunohistochemical techniques were used to characterize the expression of zebrin II (aldolase C) and phospholipase C beta 4 (PLC beta 4) in the cerebellar cortex of two hummingbird species. A series of zebrin II immunopositive/immunonegative parasagittal stripes was apparent across most folia representing three major transverse zones: an anterior zone with a central stripe flanked by three lateral stripes on either side; a central zone of high/low immunopositive stripes; and a posterior zone with a central stripe flanked by four to six lateral stripes on either side. In addition, both folia I and X were uniformly immunopositive. The pattern of PLC beta 4 immunoreactivity was largely complementary-PLC beta 4 positive stripes were zebrin II negative and vice versa. The similarity of zebrin II expression between the hummingbirds and the pigeon indicates that the neurochemical compartmentation of the cerebellar cortex in birds is highly conserved, but species differences in the number and width of stripes do occur. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据