3.8 Article

A standardized and automated method of perineuronal net analysis using Wisteria floribunda agglutinin staining intensity

期刊

IBRO REPORTS
卷 1, 期 -, 页码 54-60

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibror.2016.10.001

关键词

Extracellular matrix; Perineuronal net; Wisteria floribunda agglutinin (WFA); Automated image analysis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DA 033404, DA 040965]
  2. Washington State Initiative 171 (Washington State University Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Program) [128334]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Perineuronal nets (PNNs) are aggregations of extracellular matrix molecules that are critical for plasticity. Their altered development or changes during adulthood appear to contribute to a wide range of diseases/disorders of the brain. An increasing number of studies examining the contribution of PNN to various behaviors and types of plasticity have analyzed the fluorescence intensity of Wisteria floribunda agglutinin (WFA) as an indirect measure of the maturity of PNNs, with brighter WFA staining corresponding to a more mature PNN and dim WFA staining corresponding to an immature PNN. However, a clearly-defined and unified method for assessing the intensity of PNNs is critical to allow us to make comparisons across studies and to advance our understanding of how PNN plasticity contributes to normal brain function and brain disease states. Here we examined methods of PNN intensity quantification and demonstrate that creating a region of interest around each PNN and subtracting appropriate background is a viable method for PNN intensity quantification that can be automated. This method produces less variability and bias across experiments compared to other published analyses, and this method increases reproducibility and reliability of PNN intensity measures, which is critical for comparisons across studies in this emerging field. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Brain Research Organization.

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

3.8
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