4.6 Article

Combining confocal laser scanning microscopy with serial section reconstruction in the study of adult neurogenesis

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NEUROSCIENCE
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2011.00070

关键词

neurogenesis; striatum; whole mount; confocal laser scanning microscopy; serial section reconstruction

资金

  1. Compagnia di San Paolo [NEUROTRANSPLANT 2004.2019, 2008.2192]
  2. Universita di Torino
  3. PRIN
  4. Regione Piemonte - Ricerca Sanitaria Finalizzata

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current advances in imaging techniques have extended the possibility of visualizing small structures within large volumes of both fixed and live specimens without sectioning. These techniques have contributed valuable information to study neuronal plasticity in the adult brain. However, technical limits still hamper the use of these approaches to investigate neurogenic regions located far from the ventricular surface such as parenchymal neurogenic niches, or the scattered neuroblasts induced by brain lesions. Here, we present a method to combine confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and serial section reconstruction in order to reconstruct large volumes of brain tissue at cellular resolution. In this method a series of thick sections are imaged with CLSM and the resulting stacks of images are registered and 3D reconstructed. This approach is based on existing freeware software and can be performed on ordinary laboratory personal computers. By using this technique we have investigated the morphology and spatial organization of a group of doublecortin (DCX)+ neuroblasts located in the lateral striatum of the late post-natal guinea pig. The 3D study unraveled a complex network of long and poorly ramified cell processes, often fascicled and mostly oriented along the internal capsule fiber bundles. These data support CLSM serial section reconstruction as a reliable alternative to the whole mount approaches to analyze cyto-architectural features of adult germinative niches.

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

4.6
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