Premium
A comparative ultrastructural study of the trigeminal ganglion in the rat and chicken
Author(s) -
Sugiura Yasuo,
Kitoh Junzoh,
Sakai Hisashi
Publication year - 1983
Publication title -
journal of morphology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.652
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1097-4687
pISSN - 0362-2525
DOI - 10.1002/jmor.1051750110
Subject(s) - nissl body , neurofilament , biology , ultrastructure , golgi apparatus , soma , electron microscope , endoplasmic reticulum , cytochemistry , ganglion , anatomy , cytoplasm , neuron , biophysics , microbiology and biotechnology , staining , neuroscience , immunohistochemistry , genetics , physics , optics , immunology
The neurons of the trigeminal ganglia of the rat and chicken were characterized by means of light microscopic, electron microscopic, and histochemical methods. Light microscopy disclosed four types of neurons, based on the characteristics of Nissl granules: (1) large neurons with diffusely distributed and very fine granules, (2) neurons containing coarse and sparsely distributed Nissl granules, (3) neurons containing dense Nissl granules of varying size, and (4) small neurons with granules concentrated peripherally. Electron microscopy allowed further definition of these four types of neurons by the length and arrangement of flattened cisterns of granular endoplasmic reticulum (gER) and the number of neurofilaments. Type 1 cells were largest, with a mean nuclear area of 139.8 ± 28.3 μm 2 . Type 4 cells were smallest, with a mean nuclear area of 74.6 ± 20.9 μm 2 . The mean nuclear areas of type 2 and 3 cells were intermediate to those of the type 1 and 4 cells. Type 3 and 4 neurons lacked neurofilaments. Four forms of Golgi apparatus were found: (1) large bent grains forming a network throughout the soma, (2) dispersed fine granular deposits, (3) fine or small granules, and (4) coarse bent deposits arranged confluently in the perinuclear zone. In some rat neurons, the concentration of acid phosphatase reaction products suggested a high enzymatic activity, whereas the chicken ganglion cells showed no such concentration. These findings are discussed and compared with the classifications of previous studies.