On Oct 31, 4:25 am, Matthew Kirkcaldie
<Matthew.Kirkcal... from removeutas.removeedu.au> wrote:
> In article
> <7357694e-1405-4c68-b956-f16d61f58... from f37g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>> Kerry <kbro... from gmail.com> wrote:
> > Does anyone know the approximate parasagittal length of the rat
> > cerebellar (not cerebral) cortex or have a reference for where I could
> > find it measured?
>> > I was given a slide with sagittally sliced sections that together make
> > up 600 um of thickness and I want to know what proportion of the
> > cerebellar cortex I have.
>> Don't take this the wrong way, but that's kind of a meaningless
> question. The cerebellum is a tightly infolded three dimensional
> arrangement of a two-dimensional sheet; asking "what proportion of the
> cerebellar cortex" is represented by a parasagittal block 600 µm thick
> would require a pretty detailed analysis of the overall shape of the
> cortical sheet when unfolded, plus a projection of where the slice lay
> on the unfolded sheet.
>> It would be easier to give a less nit-picking answer if you explained
> why you want to know - is it an estimate of volume, or asking if it's
> representative, or what?
>> Cheers, MK.
> ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**
Sorry, I should have been more explicit w/ the given purpose. I am not
trying to use this information for any quantitative analysis. For now
I am just trying to get an estimation of width (e.g. Euclidean
distance from the most extreme sagittal points end to end). However,
if I new the volume of the cerebellar cortex I could calculate the
convex hull volume of the section I have to get a more exact
proportion. I would guess the total volume is more readily available,
but if I could find a picture w/ a scale bar of the cerebellum viewed
from the rostral or caudal direction I could get an idea of how much
section I have. The latter may be quantitatively meaningless but
qualitatively, for those who have knowledge of the cerebellar cortical
size and shape, one could infer what proportion of the cortex I am
studying. A crude approximation is good enough as I am just trying to
provide a cartoon that gives a rough idea (e.g. it is meaningful to
say whether I have closer to 1% or 90% of the entire cerebellar