4.4 Article

Influence of sex and estrous cycle, but not laterality, on the neuronal somatic volume of the posterodorsal medial amygdala of rats

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 405, 期 1-2, 页码 153-158

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2006.06.054

关键词

amygdaloid complex; sexual dimorphism; estrous cycle; serial-section reconstruction; Cavalieri method; neuron

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present Study was to measure the cell body volume of neurons from the posterodorsal subnucleus of the medial amygdala (MePD) of adult mate (n = 5) and diestrus, proestrus and estrus female (n = 4-5 in each group) rats to reveal a possible sexual dimorphism, estrous cycle variations and laterality in this morphological parameter. The brains of adult Wistar rats were sectioned (1 mu m), stained with 1% toluidine blue and the stereological estimation of neuronal soma volume of both sides of MePD was realized using the Cavalieri method and the technique of point counting. Data were compared by a two-way ANOVA for repeated measures and the least significance difference post hoc test. In the MePD, mean neuronal somatic volume showed a statistical difference among groups (p = 0.005), but neither an effect of laterality (p = 0.33) nor interactions between groups and laterality (p = 0.78) were. found. Post hoc test showed that males (mean +/- S.E.M., 2075.67 +/- 135.79 mu m(3)) have larger mean neuronal somatic volume compared to females in proestrus (1503.30 +/- 44.46 mu m(3)) and in estrus (1616.69 +/- 71.49 mu m(3), p < 0.05 in both cases), but not in diestrus (1940.78 +/- 129.68 mu m(3), p > 0.05). Moreover, diestrus females displayed larger mean neuronal somatic volume than proestrus female rats (p < 0.05). It is suggested that neuronal somatic volume is another sexually dimorphic finding in the MePD, for which it is relevant to set apart the different phases of the estrous cycle to reveal the presence of gonadal hormones effects in the rat MePD neurons. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.4
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