4.6 Article

Dendritic Morphology of Pyramidal Neurons in the Chimpanzee Neocortex: Regional Specializations and Comparison to Humans

期刊

CEREBRAL CORTEX
卷 23, 期 10, 页码 2429-2436

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhs239

关键词

area 10; dendrites; evolution; Golgi; primate cerebral cortex

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [BCS-0515484, BCS-0549117, BCS-0824531, DGE-0801634]
  2. National Institutes of Health [NS042867]
  3. Yerkes National Primate Research Center [RR000165]
  4. James S. McDonnell Foundation [22002078, 220020293]
  5. Kavli Institute for Brain and Mind
  6. University of California, San Diego
  7. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  8. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0827531] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The primate cerebral cortex is characterized by regional variation in the structure of pyramidal neurons, with more complex dendritic arbors and greater spine density observed in prefrontal compared with sensory and motor cortices. Although there are several investigations in humans and other primates, virtually nothing is known about regional variation in the morphology of pyramidal neurons in the cerebral cortex of great apes, humans' closest living relatives. The current study uses the rapid Golgi stain to quantify the dendritic structure of layer III pyramidal neurons in 4 areas of the chimpanzee cerebral cortex: Primary somatosensory (area 3b), primary motor (area 4), prestriate visual (area 18), and prefrontal (area 10) cortex. Consistent with previous studies in humans and macaque monkeys, pyramidal neurons in the prefrontal cortex of chimpanzees exhibit greater dendritic complexity than those in other cortical regions, suggesting that prefrontal cortical evolution in primates is characterized by increased potential for integrative connectivity. Compared with chimpanzees, the pyramidal neurons of humans had significantly longer and more branched dendritic arbors in all cortical regions.

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