The reticular theory versus neuron doctrine debate was one of the most divisive and controversial intellectual debates of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The reticularist side, championed by Camillo Golgi and Joseph von Gerlach, believed that the entire nervous system consisted of a single continuous network of nerve fibers and cell bodies. Santiago Ramon y Cajal and the neuronists, on the other hand, were convinced that the nervous system was composed of discrete nerve cells called neurons.
Prior to the nineteenth century, little attention was paid to the cellular physiology of the nervous system. In the 1830’s, however, the first descriptions of cells as the fundamental unit of biological organisms (what would later become …show more content…
Forel, along with Wilhelm His and Fridtjof Nansen, were among the first provide counter-evidence to the reticular theory during the mid 1880’s. Forel began his work with Johan von Gudden, assisting Gudden in the creation of “Gudden’s microtome”, a microtome able to house the entire human brain (3, pp 92). This allowed Forel to study the anatomy of the thalamus in-depth, along with its connections to the basal ganglia (3, pp 85). Gudden also taught Forel the degeneration method of studying connections in the brain, a technique pioneered by Augustus Waller in 1850. Waller would cut nerves to various areas and observe decomposition of nerve “tubers” to study the distribution of nerve connections (16). Based on the decomposition pattern, Waller’s findings suggested that nerve fibers originated from the cell body, using it as a source of nutrients …show more content…
He also observed “protoplasmic processes” (dendrites) and nerve fibers growing out of these nerve cells (6), duplicating observations made by Deiters (5). In 1887, Fridtjof Nansen used Golgi’s technique to demonstrate that anastomoses did not occur between ganglion cells in the nervous systems of primitive invertebrates (8). Performing their studies at the same time, but unbeknownst to each other, Forel, His, and Nansen can be regarded as the first “anti-reticularists”, greatly influencing Cajal. Even earlier however, was Edward Schafer, who in 1877 studied the jellyfish nervous system and saw no connections between the nerve elements in their mantles (10). One year after Forel and Nansen published their results, Cajal first articulated the neuron doctrine, and disseminated the theory to the German Anatomical Society the year thereafter (7). In 1891, Heinrich Waldeyer gave an extensive review of the evidence for the neuron doctrine, coining the term ‘neuron’ in the process (12). Not to be outdone, Forel made the first claim to priority for the idea that nerve cells exist as discrete entities that same year (2, pp 15). Current authors, such as R.W. Guillery, reject this claim, arguing that Forel overextended his conclusions based on degeneration alone
Prior to the nineteenth century, little attention was paid to the cellular physiology of the nervous system. In the 1830’s, however, the first descriptions of cells as the fundamental unit of biological organisms (what would later become …show more content…
Forel, along with Wilhelm His and Fridtjof Nansen, were among the first provide counter-evidence to the reticular theory during the mid 1880’s. Forel began his work with Johan von Gudden, assisting Gudden in the creation of “Gudden’s microtome”, a microtome able to house the entire human brain (3, pp 92). This allowed Forel to study the anatomy of the thalamus in-depth, along with its connections to the basal ganglia (3, pp 85). Gudden also taught Forel the degeneration method of studying connections in the brain, a technique pioneered by Augustus Waller in 1850. Waller would cut nerves to various areas and observe decomposition of nerve “tubers” to study the distribution of nerve connections (16). Based on the decomposition pattern, Waller’s findings suggested that nerve fibers originated from the cell body, using it as a source of nutrients …show more content…
He also observed “protoplasmic processes” (dendrites) and nerve fibers growing out of these nerve cells (6), duplicating observations made by Deiters (5). In 1887, Fridtjof Nansen used Golgi’s technique to demonstrate that anastomoses did not occur between ganglion cells in the nervous systems of primitive invertebrates (8). Performing their studies at the same time, but unbeknownst to each other, Forel, His, and Nansen can be regarded as the first “anti-reticularists”, greatly influencing Cajal. Even earlier however, was Edward Schafer, who in 1877 studied the jellyfish nervous system and saw no connections between the nerve elements in their mantles (10). One year after Forel and Nansen published their results, Cajal first articulated the neuron doctrine, and disseminated the theory to the German Anatomical Society the year thereafter (7). In 1891, Heinrich Waldeyer gave an extensive review of the evidence for the neuron doctrine, coining the term ‘neuron’ in the process (12). Not to be outdone, Forel made the first claim to priority for the idea that nerve cells exist as discrete entities that same year (2, pp 15). Current authors, such as R.W. Guillery, reject this claim, arguing that Forel overextended his conclusions based on degeneration alone