This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (15)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

H. J. GAMBLE, PhD; ROSEMARY A. EAMES

Arch Neurol. 1966;14(1):50-53.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Two SPECIMENS of human dorsal nerve root have been obtained, sufficiently fresh for electron microscopy. They have, respectively, some of the characteristics of normal and long-damaged dorsal roots as seen in the rat,¹ but they also exhibit features not seen in rat material, which, taken with the rarity of the material, make the findings of some interest.

Material and Methods

The tissues were small pieces of a fourth lumbar dorsal nerve root and of a sixth cervical dorsal nerve rootlet, obtained at operation when they were fixed for three hours in buffered 1% osmium tetroxide and then stained for three hours in 1% phosphotungstic acid during the dehydration which led to embedding in Araldite. Sections were cut on Porter-Blum and Huxley ultramicrotomes, mounted upon unfilmed copper grids, and examined in an Elmiskop I electron microscope.

The lumbar root was obtained from a patient who had presented with slow . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
LONDON

From the Department of Anatomy, St. Thomas's Hospital Medical School.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Aug 16, 1965; accepted Sept 25.

Reprint requests to St. Thomas's Hospital Medical School, London SE 1, England (Dr. Gamble).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?