Cargando…

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

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 im...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blackman, Arne V., Grabuschnig, Stefan, Legenstein, Robert, Sjöström, P. Jesper
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4092368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25071470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2014.00065
_version_ 1782325487453863936
author Blackman, Arne V.
Grabuschnig, Stefan
Legenstein, Robert
Sjöström, P. Jesper
author_facet Blackman, Arne V.
Grabuschnig, Stefan
Legenstein, Robert
Sjöström, P. Jesper
author_sort Blackman, Arne V.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4092368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40923682014-07-28 A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling Blackman, Arne V. Grabuschnig, Stefan Legenstein, Robert Sjöström, P. Jesper Front Neuroanat Neuroscience 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. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4092368/ /pubmed/25071470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2014.00065 Text en Copyright © 2014 Blackman, Grabuschnig, Legenstein and Sjöström. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Blackman, Arne V.
Grabuschnig, Stefan
Legenstein, Robert
Sjöström, P. Jesper
A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title_full A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title_fullStr A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title_short A comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
title_sort comparison of manual neuronal reconstruction from biocytin histology or 2-photon imaging: morphometry and computer modeling
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4092368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25071470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2014.00065
work_keys_str_mv AT blackmanarnev acomparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT grabuschnigstefan acomparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT legensteinrobert acomparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT sjostrompjesper acomparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT blackmanarnev comparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT grabuschnigstefan comparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT legensteinrobert comparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling
AT sjostrompjesper comparisonofmanualneuronalreconstructionfrombiocytinhistologyor2photonimagingmorphometryandcomputermodeling