Animal cells and systems

The Korean Society for Integrative Biology (한국통합생물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of age and gender on spatial orientation of human corpus callosum in healthy Koreans

  • Hwang, Seung-Jun (Department of Anatomy and Cell biology, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan) ;
  • Park, Chan (Department of Anatomy and Cell biology, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan) ;
  • Hong, Hea-Nam (Department of Anatomy and Cell biology, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan) ;
  • Ryu, Ji-Yeon (Hanil General Hospital, Neurology) ;
  • Park, In-Sung (Korea University, College of Medicine, Anatomy) ;
  • Rhyu, Im-Joo (Korea University, College of Medicine, Anatomy)
  • Received : 2011.03.07
  • Accepted : 2011.05.20
  • Published : 2011.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The changes in the corpus callosum (CC) with age and gender remain largely subject to dispute, which might come from the different strategies for analyzing the size and shape of CC. We have investigated this issue by measuring some variables reflecting the spatial orientation of CC on magnetic resonance imaging in Koreans, which minimize individual variances in the brain. The subjects were composed of young adults in their twenties (51 male, 59 female) and elderly adults in their sixties and seventies (60 male, 71 female). The total area of CC, length and height of CC, the central angle and the four angles suggested by Oka et al. were measured. The whole area and the central angle of CC were not significantly affected by age and gender. The height and length of CC were significantly greater in elderly people. The angle connecting genu, upper notch of pons and splenium was significantly larger in the elderly group. Furthermore, all four angles were significantly different between male and female subjects. These results confirm that the spatial orientation of CC is influenced by age and gender.

Keywords

References

  1. Allen LS, Richey MF, Chai YM, Gorski RA. 1991. Sex differences in the corpus callosum of the living human being. J Neurosci. 11:933-942.
  2. Allen JS, Damasio H, Grabowski TJ, Bruss J, ZhangW. 2003. Sexual dimorphism and asymmetries in the gray-white composition of the human cerebrum. Neuroimage. 18:880-894. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00034-X
  3. Bishop KM, Wahlsten D. 1997. Sex differences in the human corpus callosum: myth or reality? Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 21:581-601. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(96)00049-8
  4. Byne W, Bleier R, Houston L. 1988. Variations in human corpus callosum do not predict gender: a study using magnetic resonance imaging. Behav Neurosci. 102: 222-227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.102.2.222
  5. Clarke S, Kraftsik R, Van der Loos H, Innocenti GM. 1989. Forms and measures of adult and developing human corpus callosum: is there sexual dimorphism? J Comp Neurol. 280:213-230. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902800205
  6. Clarke JM, Lufkin RB, Zaidel E. 1993. Corpus callosum morphometry and dichotic listening performance: individual differences in functional interhemispheric inhibition? Neuropsychologia. 31:547-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(93)90051-Z
  7. DeLacoste-Utamsing C, Holloway RL. 1982. Sexual dimorphism in the human corpus callosum. Science. 216:1431-1432. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7089533
  8. Driesen NR, Raz N. 1995. The influence of sex, age, and handedness on corpus callosum morphology: a metaanalysis. Psychobiology. 23:240-247.
  9. Dubb A, Gur R, Avants B, Gee J. 2003. Characterization of sexual dimorphism in the human corpus callosum. Neuroimage. 20:512-519. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00313-6
  10. Hermann B, Hansen R, Seidenberg M, Magnotta V, O'Leary D. 2003. Neurodevelopmental vulnerability of the corpus callosum to childhood onset localization-related epilepsy. Neuroimage. 18:284-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(02)00044-7
  11. Hopper KD, Patel S, Cann TS,Wilcox T, Schaeffer JM. 1994. The relationship of age, gender, handedness, and sidedness to the size of the corpus callosum. Acad Radiol. 1:243-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(05)80723-8
  12. Hwang SJ, Ji EK, Lee EK, Kim YM, Shin DY, Cheon YH, Rhyu IJ. 2004. Gender differences in the corpus callosum of neonates. Neuroreport. 15:1029-1032. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200404290-00019
  13. Hynd GW, Hall J, Novey ES, Eliopulos D, Black K, Gonzalez JJ, Edmonds JE, Riccio C, Cohen M. 1995 Dyslexia and corpus callosum morphology. Arch Neurol. 52:32-38. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1995.00540250036010
  14. Lee BY, Sohn JH, Choi MH, Lee SJ, Kim HS, Yang JW, Choi JS, Yi JH, Tack GR, Chung SC. 2009. Avolumetric study of the corpus callosum in 20s and 40s Korean people. Brain Struct Funct. 213:463-467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-009-0209-5
  15. Oka S, Miyamoto O, Janjua NA, Honjo-Fujiwara N, Ohkawa M, Nagao S, Kondo H, Minami T, Toyoshima T, Itano T. 1999. Re-evaluation of sexual dimorphism in human corpus callosum. Neuroreport. 10:937-940. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-199904060-00008
  16. Panizzon MS, Hoff AL, Nordahl TE, Kremen WS, Reisman B, Wieneke M, Harris D, Goodman C, Espinoza S, Liu W, Lim K. 2003. Sex differences in the corpus callosum of patients with schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 62:115-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-9964(02)00432-2
  17. Parashos IA, Wilkinson WE, Coffey CE. 1995. Magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum: predictors of size in normal adults. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 7:35-41. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.7.1.35
  18. Pfefferbaum A, Sullivan EV, Swan GE, Carmelli D. 2000. Brain structure in men remains highly heritable in the seventh and eighth decades of life. Neurobiol Aging. 21:63-74.
  19. Piven J, Bailey J, Ranson BJ, Arndt S. 1997. An MRI study of the corpus callosum in autism. Am J Psychiatry. 154:1051-1056. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.154.8.1051
  20. Sperry R. 1982. Some effects of disconnecting the cerebral hemispheres. Science. 217:1223-1226. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7112125
  21. Suganthy J, Raghuram L, Antonisamy B, Vettivel S, Madhavi C, Koshi R. 2003. Gender- and age-related differences in the morphology of the corpus callosum. Clin Anat. 16:396-403 https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.10161
  22. Sullivan EV, Rosenbloom MJ, Desmond JE, Pfefferbaum A. 2001. Sex differences in corpus callosum size: relationship to age and intracranial size. Neurobiol Aging. 22:603-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-4580(01)00232-9
  23. Sullivan EV, Pfefferbaum A, Adalsteinsson E, Swan GE, Carmelli D. 2002. Differential rates of regional brain change in callosal and ventricular size: a 4-year longitudinal MRI study of elderly men. Cereb Cortex. 12:438-445. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/12.4.438
  24. Takeda S, Hirashima Y, Ikeda H, Yamamoto H, Sugino M, Endo S. 2003. Determination of indices of the corpus callosum associated with normal aging in Japanese individuals. Neuroradiology. 45:513-518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-003-1019-8
  25. Tomaiuolo F, Di Paola M, Caravale B, Vicari S, Petrides M, Caltagirone C. 2002. Morphology and morphometry of the corpus callosum in Williams syndrome: a T1- weighted MRI study. Neuroreport. 13:2281-2284. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200212030-00022
  26. Ullmann MT, Miranda RA, Tavers ML. 2008. Sex differences in the neurocognition of language. In: Becker JB, Berjley KJ, Geary N, Hampson E, Herman JP, Young EA, editors editors. Sex difference in the brain-from genes to behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 291-309.
  27. Weis S, Kimbacher M, Wenger E, Neuhold A. 1993. Morphometric analysis of the corpus callosum using MR: correlation of measurements with aging in healthy individuals. Am J Neuroradiol. 14:637-645.
  28. Witelson SF. 1989. Hand and sex differences in the isthmus and genu of the human corpus callosum. A postmortem morphological study. Brain. 112:799-835. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/112.3.799
  29. Witelson SF, Goldsmith CH. 1991. The relationship of hand preference to anatomy of the corpus callosum in men. Brain Res. 545:175-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(91)91284-8