Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35236783›Full record

ReviewMolecules and cells2022

Finding Needles in a Haystack with Light: Resolving the Microcircuitry of the Brain with Fluorescence Microscopy.

Jong-Cheol Rah, Joon Ho Choi

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules and cells, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jong-Cheol RahLaboratory of Neurophysiology, Korea Brain Research Institute, Daegu 41062, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3780-0522
Joon Ho ChoiLaboratory of Neurophysiology, Korea Brain Research Institute, Daegu 41062, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2090-8724
Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology · KRKorea Brain Research Institute · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To understand the microcircuitry of the brain, the anatomical and functional connectivity among neurons must be resolved. One of the technical hurdles to achieving this goal is that the anatomical connections, or synapses, are often smaller than the diffraction limit of light and thus are difficult to resolve by conventional microscopy, while the microcircuitry of the brain is on the scale of 1 mm or larger. To date, the gold standard method for microcircuit reconstruction has been electron microscopy (EM). However, despite its rapid development, EM has clear shortcomings as a method for microcircuit reconstruction. The greatest weakness of this method is arguably its incompatibility with functional and molecular analysis. Fluorescence microscopy, on the other hand, is readily compatible with numerous physiological and molecular analyses. We believe that recent advances in various fluorescence microscopy techniques offer a new possibility for reliable synapse detection in large volumes of neural circuits. In this minireview, we summarize recent advances in fluorescence-based microcircuit reconstruction. In the same vein as these studies, we introduce our recent efforts to analyze the long-range connectivity among brain areas and the subcellular distribution of synapses of interest in relatively large volumes of cortical tissue with array tomography and superresolution microscopy.

Indexed as

BrainSynapsesMicroscopy, ElectronMicroscopy, FluorescenceNeuronsactivity markerscircuit reconstructionconnectomeelectron microscopymicrocircuitrysuperresolution microscopy

Identifiers

PMID35236783
PMCPMC8907002
OpenAlexW4214825161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.