Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25071470›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2014

A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling.

Arne V Blackman, Stefan Grabuschnig, Robert Legenstein, P Jesper Sjöström

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroanatomy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. In Vitro Investigation of Synaptic Plasticity.Cold Spring Harbor protocols · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Editorial: Quantitative Analysis of Neuroanatomy.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Arne V BlackmanDepartment of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, University College London London, UK.
Stefan GrabuschnigInstitute for Theoretical Computer Science, Graz University of Technology Graz, Austria.
Robert LegensteinInstitute for Theoretical Computer Science, Graz University of Technology Graz, Austria.
P Jesper SjöströmDepartment of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, University College London London, UK ; Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Centre for Research in Neuroscience, The Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal General Hospital Montreal, QC, Canada.
Graz University of Technology · ATMontreal General Hospital · CA

Funding

CIHR 126137-1CIHR 130175-1Medical Research Council G0700188
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate 3D reconstruction of neurons is vital for applications linking anatomy and physiology. Reconstructions are typically created using Neurolucida after biocytin histology (BH). An alternative inexpensive and fast method is to use freeware such as Neuromantic to reconstruct from fluorescence imaging (FI) stacks acquired using 2-photon laser-scanning microscopy during physiological recording. We compare these two methods with respect to morphometry, cell classification, and multicompartmental modeling in the NEURON simulation environment. Quantitative morphological analysis of the same cells reconstructed using both methods reveals that whilst biocytin reconstructions facilitate tracing of more distal collaterals, both methods are comparable in representing the overall morphology: automated clustering of reconstructions from both methods successfully separates neocortical basket cells from pyramidal cells but not BH from FI reconstructions. BH reconstructions suffer more from tissue shrinkage and compression artifacts than FI reconstructions do. FI reconstructions, on the other hand, consistently have larger process diameters. Consequently, significant differences in NEURON modeling of excitatory post-synaptic potential (EPSP) forward propagation are seen between the two methods, with FI reconstructions exhibiting smaller depolarizations. Simulated action potential backpropagation (bAP), however, is indistinguishable between reconstructions obtained with the two methods. In our hands, BH reconstructions are necessary for NEURON modeling and detailed morphological tracing, and thus remain state of the art, although they are more labor intensive, more expensive, and suffer from a higher failure rate due to the occasional poor outcome of histological processing. However, for a subset of anatomical applications such as cell type identification, FI reconstructions are superior, because of indistinguishable classification performance with greater ease of use, essentially 100% success rate, and lower cost.

Indexed as

2-photon imagingcell-type classificationinterneuronsmorphologymulticompartmental modelingneocortexNeurolucidareconstruction

Identifiers

PMID25071470
PMCPMC4092368
OpenAlexW2123495095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.