Buradasınız

İnce Bağırsak Yüzey Alanı Hesaplanmasında İki Histolojik Metodun Karşılaştırılması

Comparison of Two Histological Methods for Estimating Surface Area of Small Bowl

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Abstract (2. Language): 
: A geometric model and an unbiased estimation using vertical section for villous surface estimation were compared. Small bowels of 10 domestic fowls were dissected and 8cm of bowl segments from mercel’s diverticulum towards distal direction were subjected to estimation. In geometric model transversal sections of bowel and a test lattice consist of vertical and horizontal test lines were used. For unbiased estimation; bowel was opened along its length, laidflat on a substratum and sectioned vertical to the substratum. Then a cycloid test lattice was used. It was found that the estimated total surface due tovilli was significantly different between the two methods
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu araştırmada ince bağırsağın villus yüzey alanıhesaplanmasında sterelojik dikey kesit alma yöntemi ile geometrik modelleme yöntemi karşılaştırıldı. Çalışmada 10 adet Broyler cinsi tavuğun ince bağırsağının Mercel divertikulumundan itibaren distal yönde alınan 8 cm lik parçasıkullanıldı. Geometrik model için, enine alınan bağırsak kesitleri ile enine ve boyuna çizgilerden oluşan (kare) grid kullanıldı. Dikey kesit için bağırsak parçalarıboyuna açıldı. Enine ve boyuna çizgilerden oluşan grid zemin üzerine yerleştirilerek trimlendi ve kesitleri alındı. Kesitler sikloid sonda yardımıile değerlendirildi. Çalışma sonucunda iki yöntem ile elde edilen bağırsak yüzey alanısonuçlarıarasında istatistiksel olarak önemli fark olduğu tespit edildi
43-50

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Baddeley, A.J., Gundersen, H.J.G. and Cruz-Orive, L.M.: Estimation of surface area
from vertical sections. J.Micros., 1986; 142: 259-276.
2. Elbrnød, V.S., Dantzer, V., Mayhew, T.M. and Skadhauge, E.: Correlation of structure
and function in the chicken lower intestine (coprodeum): A review. Comp. Biochem.
Physiol., 1997; 118A: 243-246.
3. Ginneken, C.V., Meir, F.V., SYS, S. and Weyns, A.: Stereologic characteristics of pig
small intestine during normal development. Digestive Disease and Sciences., 2002; 47: 868-878.
4. Howard, C.V., Reed M.G.:Estimating of reference volumeusing the Cavalieri method.
In:Unbiased Stereology. Eds. Howard, C.V., Reed M.G., Oxford, BiosScientific Puplishers.,
1998; 55-65.
5. Jin, L., Reynolds, L.P., Redmer, D.A., Caton J.S., Crenshaw, J.D.:Effects of dietary
fiber on intestinal growth, cell proliferation and morphology in growing pigs. J. Anim. Sci.,
1994; 72: 2270-2278.
6. Makanya, A.N., Maina, J.N., Mayhew, T.M., Tschanz, S.A. and Burri, P.H.: A
stereological comparison of villous and microvillous surfaces in small intestines of
frugivorous and entomophagous bats: species, inter-individual and craniocaudal differences.
J. Exp. Bio., 1997; 200: 2415-2423.
7. Mayhew, T.M.: Geometric model for estimating villous surface area in rat small bowel is
justified by unbiased estimates obtained using vertical sections. J. Anat., 1988; 161: 187-193.
8. Mayhew, T.M.:Striated brush border of intestinal absorptive epithelial cells: stereological
studies on microvillus morphology in different adaptive states. J. Elect. Micros. Tech., 1990;
16: 45-55.
9. Mayhew, T.M. and Carlos, F.L.: Mechanisms of adaptation in rat small intestine: regional
differences in quantitative morphology during normal growth and experimental hypertrophy.
J. Anat., 1989; 164:189-200.
10. Mayhew, T.M., Elbrnød, V.S., Dantzer, V. and Skadhauge, E.: Quantitative analysis of
factors contributing to expansion of microvillous surface area in the coprodaeum of hens
transferred to a low-NaCl diet. J. Anat., 1992; 181:73-77.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com