TABLE 2.
Distribution of Terminal and Cell Body Labeling Across Cases
| Cell bodies1 |
Voxels with labeled terminals1 |
|||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correction factor |
1934 (BDA)
|
396 (BDA)
|
1892 (FB)
|
Average % (±std) |
1934 (BDA) |
1892 (BDA) |
9409 (BDA) |
3024 (BDA) |
396 (BDA) |
Average (±std) |
||||
| Corrected no. cell bodies in analyzed sections (n = 7) |
% of contralateral hemisphere |
Corrected no. cell bodies in analyzed sections (n=5) |
% of contralateral hemisphere |
Corrected no. cell bodies in analyzed sections (n = 7) |
% of contralateral hemisphere |
% | % | % | % | % | % | |||
| PMv | 0.76 | 172 | 63.5 | 70 | 42.0 | 696 | 38.4 | 48.0 (13.6) | 44.4 | 51.8 | 42.1 | 58.8 | 34.5 | 46.3 (9.3) |
| M1rostral | 0.74 | 4 | 1.4 | 24 | 14.1 | 103 | 5.7 | 7.1 (6.4) | 6.8 | 6.5 | 17.9 | 6.2 | 15.5 | 10.6 (5.7) |
| M1caudal2 | 0.75 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0.2 | 0.1 (0.1) | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.2 (0.2) |
| PMd | 0.75 | 2 | 0.8 | 7.5 | 4.5 | 176 | 9.7 | 5.0 (4.5) | 5.5 | 6.0 | 6.9 | 9.3 | 12.2 | 8.0 (2.8) |
| SMA | 0.74 | 48 | 17.6 | 23 | 13.8 | 438 | 24.2 | 18.5 (5.2) | 31.5 | 29.8 | 20.4 | 15.5 | 20.0 | 23.4 (6.9) |
| CMAs | 0.75 | 5 | 2.0 | 3 | 1.8 | 191 | 10.6 | 4.8 (5.0) | 5.1 | 0 | 1.9 | 4.1 | 6.8 | 3.6 (2.7) |
| FR | 0.74 | 40 | 14.6 | 27 | 16.1 | 82 | 4.5 | 11.8 (6.3) | 4.7 | 5.4 | 10.7 | 6.2 | 6.4 | 6.7 (2.4) |
| AO2 | 0.75 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4.5 | 100 | 5.5 | 3.3 (2.9) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.4) |
| PO/IP2 | 0.75 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2.2 | 12 | 0.7 | 1.0 (1.2) | 1.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.4 | 1.0 (1.5) |
| PP2 | 0.75 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9 | 10 | 0.5 | 0.5 (0.4) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.2 | 0.0 (0.1) |
1
Percentages of total contralateral cell bodies or voxels with terminals. Percentages for cell body labeling was based on numbers of cell bodies per section corrected for overcounting based on soma diameters in each specific area (see Table 1).
2
These areas had too few and inconsistent cells labeled with BDA to obtain an average cell diameter. Instead, an average correction factor was derived from the areas with consistent labeling, and used to correct these counts. For this reason, these areas were excluded from our statistical analysis of cell body versus terminal distribution.