[nonbel]

I had some old pictures of stained rodent brains and saw something looked qualitatively like what they described in the first (and only) image I checked. Since they dont give any definite criteria for me to compare against, what can I do?

[hyperion2010]

Well, they give about the most definite criteria they can given current techniques, which is the transcriptomic profile. In fig 2e [0] they also give a bouton density profile. If you still have the pictures and have neurogliaform and basket cells stained with the same technique, you should be able to determine whether you are in the ballpark.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-018-0205-2/figures/2

[nonbel]

I looked at the paper. I mean there needs to be a table that tells us what they consider the acceptable range for spine density, bouton density, soma size, soma ellipsity or whatever shape stats, branching stats, etc.

I dont really know what to do with that figure 2e... it looks like they cherry picked stats where they saw a "significant difference" from the other types of cells they looked at.

[buntress]

I'd imagine there are slides, and slides, and slides of ape neurons in circulation, possibly imaged as photomicrographs and stored in digital libraries, and heaping data sets of genomic primate data.

Are data rights costly? I doubt that sort of information has a shelf life. Consider that HELA cells are still around.

If they release the specific results, and how they arrived at such conclusions, others should be able to take that in hand, and move quickly to look at primate corollaries.