Bipolar cell of the vestibular nerve ganglion (Ramon y Cajal) by Nick Quartapella
Description:
The image I chose to replicate was Bipolar cell of the vestibular nerve ganglion by Ramon y Cajal. The original drawing was done using a pen after observing bipolar cells under the microscope stained with silver nitrate. I chose my final piece to be on an 8-inch by 10-inch glass sheet, drawn with a fine-tipped marker. To start off preparing my piece, I first practiced sketching with pencil on line paper to get a feel of what strategy I wanted to use to draw. I figured out that I would draw the cell bodies of each cell, one at a time, so that I could draw smaller, more manageable components. Next, I practiced tracing on wrapping paper and traced an outline on glass. I drew the rest without tracing so that I could work on transitioning over to my final product. I found that for the final product, it was necessary to practice drawing on a paper underneath my final sketch first and then marking on the glass so that I wouldn’t have to worry about smudging the glass if I made a mistake. To do that, I used a pencil and a ruler and line paper to make sure I was not slanting the writing for the figure caption. The fine-tipped marker also allowed me to be more detailed in my final drawing instead of using a regular Sharpie. I also printed an enlarged version of Ramon y Cajal’s original piece—it was my own version of using a microscope as Cajal did and being able to visualize each component of the cell in detail. The final drawing may have strayed slightly from the original piece, but I felt that using a glass medium allowed it to not have any smudges or shadowing and look as close to the original drawing as I could possibly make it. I expected the image to differ somewhat from the original piece considering that I did not have access to a microscope like Cajal and because advanced imaging techniques today like different staining and electron micrographs have allowed for even more accurate descriptions. Because of this, I know that I must have implemented some sort of bias and subjectivity in my drawing, but I paid attention to every turn of the cell and component of the cell body that I feel that I was able to uphold objectivity in the best way that I could.
Before you start, provide answers to the following:
- What is this image for?
This image is for the bipolar cells of the vestibular nerve ganglion in a rabbit.
- Where is the image coming from? What do we know of its source? Its audience?
This image comes from Ramon y Canal’s book Textura del sistema nervioso del hombre y de los vertebratos. Ramon y Cajal uses the Golgi method, where he stained the bipolar cells in silver nitrate. The book has drawings that reveal the anatomical structures of components of the nervous system with an audience that seems to be interested in these structures as well as the flow of information of neurons throughout the nervous system.
Materials & measurements
- Can we identify all the materials needed to make it?
Yes, the Golgi method involves potassium dichromate and silver nitrate. The cells were visualized in a microscope, and the drawings were produced on paper using a pen.
- Are there multiple varieties of tools used to make it?
There are not; however, I will be varying the media in which I replicate this drawing. First, I will use line paper to familiarize myself with the drawing, then I will trace the drawing on both wrapping paper and glass, and finally I will sketch the drawing on glass without tracing.
- What is the stability of a material over time?
Ramon y Cajal’s method has proven to be very stable, but there are now many varieties of ways to stain components of tissue and image these results under a microscope. But Ramon y Cajal’s images are still studied and are an important part in the history of neuroscience. My final image will be fairly stable because I will be using glass, so it will hold up provided that it does not break.
Tools & equipment
- What tools are necessary?
I will need pencils and erasers for my earlier sketches as well as a ruler to separate the cells into manageable components. For the earlier sketches, I will also use line paper and wrapping paper. Next, I will need glass as well as markers to draw on the glass as well as pieces of glass.
- What are the best ways to replicate the effects of inaccessible tools?
Rather than using a microscope like Ramon y Cajal had access to, I plan on blowing up the image so that I can pay attention to the most minute details. I also have some background in bipolar cells, so my knowledge will also aid me in drawing the components as it had for Ramon y Cajal when he produced this image.
- How do technological changes impact our interpretation/expectation of the image? (e.g., engraving, woodcut, silver chromate)
I feel that Ramon y Cajal will be closer to objectivity with the technology that he had available to him, such as observing the cells under a microscope as well as staining them with sodium nitrate. It is possible that my drawing may change our interpretation of the cells, as I may accidentally add or omit a detail that changes something vital about the cell’s function. I also expect my image to stray somewhat further from objectivity than Ramon y Cajal’s image. He was able to see the cells as they were under the microscope and then draw what he saw on paper. I am already once removed from the “objective” image, so my lack of technology could end up making an even more subjective, biased drawing. Especially with the advanced imaging that we have available to us today, all the way to the use of the electron micrograph and imaging, even if I am able to replicate Ramon y Cajal’s perfectly, the technological changes over time will likely make my image appear less accurate and objective.
FIELD NOTE 1 OF 3
Date: 2/8/2022
People Involved: Nick (me)
Location: Martel College dorm
Reconstruction conditions:
It was quiet in my room except for the occasional chatter of my suite mates. I also had music playing on low to relax myself as I attempted the sketch.
Time and duration of reconstruction:
I worked for 1 hour, from 4:00-5:00 pm.
Equipment and tools used:
For my first sketch, I used a mechanical pencil, line paper, an eraser, a phone to take pictures of my progress along the way, and a ruler as a marker to divide each component of the drawing into sections to get a more accurate drawing.
Subjective factors, e.g., how things smelled/looked/felt:
I do not pride myself in being the best artist, so I noticed I was somewhat nervous and unsure of myself when I began my first attempt. I was overwhelmed by the details of the drawing. I could smell the freshly brewed tea from my cup as I started. The position of the sun in the sky was creating shadows on my paper, which possibly made it more difficult to sketch the bipolar cells. I started to become more sure of myself as I continued the drawing. Sectioning out the drawing into more manageable components was made easier with the line paper, as I could mark more easily how the three separate bipolar cells lined up with each other. I had trouble viewing the details in the cell bodies of the cells and had to zoom in on the image to get a better look. I also had to erase heavily with this sketch because I am left-handed, and my hand would sometimes smudge my drawing, making the drawing look more blurred than intended.
Prior knowledge that you have:
Last year, I worked at a lab at UTHealth where we studied cells in the retina such as bipolar cells in macaques. The purpose of the lab was to place disks across sections from an electron micrograph to map out the entire cell and learn more about how it connected with the cells around it. This would help us to learn more about the connections of cells in the retina and what that could possibly mean for visual disorders when these connections went wrong. I was assigned to several bipolar cells, so I was able to spend many hours building a bipolar cell from across sections and visualize the progress until I completed the cell. Thus, I had a very good idea of the anatomy of a bipolar cell.
Reflection on your practice:
The reason I chose to make a sketch on line paper is because I really wanted to get a feel of Ramon y Cajal’s work and understand the drawing at a greater depth. I am planning on using glass for my final product, so it was important that I would get comfortable with the bipolar cells before using something more valuable than line paper. I had to start over the sketch multiple times because I did not like how the proportions of the drawing were turning out. But I became more sure of myself and the product the further I moved along. After my first sketch, I feel more confident with being able to replicate the drawing as well as having as little bias as possible. I made sure to pay attention to each tiny detail and avoid cutting corners so that I could finish faster, trying to uphold objectivity. I plan next to trace on wrapping paper, then trace on glass so that I can transition from paper to glass in the smoothest way, all while gaining more confidence and learning more about respecting objectivity.
Photos/video documenting process:
Pencil on Line Paper
Questions that arise:
I had some questions come to mind after finishing my first sketch. One was how will my method differ as I move closer to my final product? How can I make sure that I am more accurate? I am also planning on using a different medium, glass, for my next drawing, so I also thought what can I do to make sure that I can have accurate, confident drawings without the use of line paper? What techniques did Ramon y Cajal use when he was drawing out this figure?
FIELD NOTE 2 OF 3
Date: 2/10/2022
People Involved: Nick (me)
Location: Greenbriar Apartments
Reconstruction conditions:
I completed my drawing while at a friend’s apartment. He was cooking dinner, so the smell of chicken was in the air. I also had chosen to play some softer music to allow myself to focus more on the drawing.
Time and duration of reconstruction:
I worked for 1 hour, from 5:00-6:00.
Equipment and tools used:
For the first sketch, which was a tracing on wrapping paper, I used a mechanical pencil, an eraser, wrapping paper, and a printout of Ramon y Cajal’s drawing on white printer paper so I could see the drawing underneath. For the second sketch, which was a combination of tracing and drawing on glass, I used the print of Ramon y Cajal’s drawing, a pencil to mark where the components of the cell body were, and a Sharpie.
Subjective factors, e.g., how things smelled/looked/felt:
Since my friend was cooking, I could smell the chicken he was cooking for fajitas. The rays of the sun were coming through the apartment, so I eventually had to move so that the light did not make it harder to work. When I did the first tracing, it was hard to see the original drawing underneath because my wrapping paper was somewhat wrinkled. When I used the glass, it was a lot easier to see the original drawing so that I could trace the outline. I was also somewhat nervous using the marker on the glass because I would not be able to erase my mistakes. Thus, I completed the glass drawing with much more caution and went a lot slower.
Prior knowledge that you have:
As I stated before, I worked in a lab that dealt with creating renderings of retinal cells from macaques last year. I worked mostly with bipolar cells, so the shape of the drawings from Ramon y Cajal was very familiar to me. After completing the first drawing, I also caught up on some literature that I had read during my time in that lab so that I could familiarize myself again on the different components of bipolar cells. Being able to study the literature made me think of Sir Charles Bell and how he recognized the importance of studying the anatomy before drawing it.
Reflection on your practice:
I was glad that I had decided to try tracing on the wrapping paper before using the glass because it made me more comfortable outlining the drawing on the glass without being able to erase, even though I was still slightly nervous. I also had to move away from tracing sometimes because the wrapping paper would sometimes shift on top of the drawing, so I had to use my vision to correct the drawing on my own without the use of tracing. This also happened with the glass although I had only planned on tracing the outline so that I could draw the insides of the drawing and be most prepared for my final drawing, which will be drawing on the same type of glass without any tracing. Moving to glass with marker for the first time was odd because I had only practiced with paper and pencil, but tracing the outlines allowed me to become accustomed to the new medium. Because I tried drawing on the medium I want to use for the final product, and I tried to move away from tracing, I now feel more comfortable that I can put together an accurate drawing for my final product and maintain a decent sense of objectivity with regard to Ramon y Cajal’s drawing. Using the glass also made my piece look closer to the original drawing because there was no smudging from the graphite and no shadows created—the marker and glass allowed for a cleaner, more distinct drawing.
Photos/video documenting process:
Tracing on wrapping paper:
Drawing on glass:
Questions that arise:
I had some questions that came up after finishing my drawings. One was how will my confidence in my artistic skills differ without being able to use tracing for the final drawing? Another question was should I use a thinner marker on the final drawing so that I could keep the lines of the drawing as accurate as possible? Another was what will I do if I need to erase a part of my drawing? Do I need to get something that will help get Sharpie off glass? How will any shakiness in my hands or how I angle my marker disrupt my ability to be as accurate as possible?
FIELD NOTE 3 OF 3
Date: 2/13/2022
People Involved: Nick (me)
Location: Martel College dorm
Reconstruction conditions:
I made sure to start the drawing when the sun went down so that I would not have any shadows from the angle of the sun obstructing my ability to draw. I used only the lighting in my room to make sure there were no shadows or glare on the glass. I again played music to relax myself as I began the drawing.
Time and duration of reconstruction:
I drew from 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm, for 1 hour and 30 minutes.
Equipment and tools used:
I used an 8 inch by 10 inch sheet of glass, a blown up printout of the Ramon y Cajal drawing on printer paper for reference, my old sketches for reference, a fine-tipped Sharpie, another printer paper underneath the sheet of glass, a pencil to section off the drawings into smaller segments, an eraser, and a ruler to help mark those spots. I also used my coffee machine and my phone so that I could create a time lapse from an angle above the glass I was drawing on.
Subjective factors, e.g., how things smelled/looked/felt:
I was worried about not tracing and going straight on the glass, so I decided to practice sketches on printer paper before starting. I listened to music and drank tea to calm my nerves and felt my heartbeat slowing down. It was dark outside, and I only had light coming from the lights in my room. The smell of a tea that I made was filling the room.
Prior knowledge that you have:
As I said before, I had worked at a lab in UTHealth dealing with the retinal cells of macaques from an electron micrograph, and I reconstructed the cells by placing disks on different sections of the electron micrograph. I worked the most with bipolar cells for the project. I also continued going over literature to understand the anatomy of bipolar cells more between my last field note and this one. I also looked into the history of microscopes at the time of Ramon y Cajal and how they differ from current microscopes to get a better understanding of how the image differs from bipolar cell images today.
Reflection on your practice:
I practiced my drawing on printer paper before starting on the glass so that I could make myself more confident in drawing with fine-tipped Sharpie on the glass. Marking out where I could draw the different cells on a printer paper underneath also helped to guide me in making sure that I was staying as close to Ramon y Cajal’s original drawing as possible. For the glass drawing, I originally had difficultly drawing because it was my first time not tracing on glass. However, as I went on, I realized I could erase the marker on the glass, which gave me more confidence in my drawing. Also, using the fine-tipped marker allowed me to express each component of the drawing in much finer detail and allowed me to mark even the faintest lines. Marking off the cells into different segments also helped me to make sure that I was drawing with the correct proportions. I also marked each component of the inside of the cell body on the printed out paper for the two larger cells so that I would not lose my place. Whenever I was not sure how to draw a piece of the drawing, I would draw using pencil on the paper underneath the glass and use that as a basis for how to draw on the glass. For the figure caption, I used line paper to make sure I was writing evenly. Based on the methods I employed, I am confident that I was able to uphold the objectivity of Ramon y Cajal’s original drawing. Finishing the drawing also made me think of Al-Haytham’s description of optics and how he used descriptions for functions of the eye and how that relates to objectivity in addition to being able to study the shape and anatomy of parts of the body.
Photos/video documenting process:
Time Lapse:
Questions that arise:
One question that I had was how accurate was I in terms of maintaining objectivity? Another question was what other methods could I have used that would have improved my accuracy? Another question was how sure can we be that Ramon y Cajal’s original drawing obeyed objectivity? And how can we be sure that an image taken of bipolar cels in a modern research facility is truly objective especially if different staining techniques are used? How would we have to change the definition of objectivity for those who cannot rely on sight?
Big Questions:
What kinds of larger social, historical, methodological questions can you ask from this process?
As I worked on my drawing, I began to think about how studying form aids in allowing us to understand function of the body. For example, historically, understanding the gyro and sulci of the brain allowed us to section off areas of the brain into regions where separate functions take place. So one question is how is the function of bipolar cells understood to be different than what Ramon y Cajal thought based on the advanced technology we have today? In terms of the methods of producing these images, I began to think about how objectivity might not be true if there is a bias from the beginning. What if the researcher is biased in producing a seemingly objective image because they already have something in mind when producing the image? An example would be using a certain antibody or stain because they are expecting to see a certain result, and maybe that expectation creates a bias. Socially, how are these historical beliefs and methods rooted in what we believe as science today? For example, why are there still racial biases in hospitals even though we know that all human bodies are strikingly similar? How far back in time do we need to study before we can really say that a current technique is really objective, especially if it is shaping our understanding of society and the people in it?
How did your questions change over time?
At first, I expressed concern about switching to different media for my drawing and how not being used to a new medium might disrupt my goal of objectivity. I also questioned how Ramon y Cajal created his own final product. Most questions related to my confidence in my drawings and if I needed new tools to help me to reach objectivity such as better ways to erase marker off the glass. I also thought about how we would have to redefine objectivity for those who could not rely on sight. As I finished my final product, I began to think about how I could have improved the objectivity had I tried different methods or used a different medium. I also asked questions about what it means to be objective, from Ramon y Cajal’s drawing to modern technology. My questions over the field notes showed that I had gone from wondering what Ramon y Cajal did to be objective and how I could improve objectivity with the plan that I had created, to what other methods I could have used to improve objectivity, to asking what it truly means to be free of bias and respect the laws of nature as much as possible and how the definition of objectivity changes for those who cannot rely on sight.
Which set of readings do you draw on as inspiration to frame your potential answers?
One reading that really comes to mind when framing my potential answers about objectivity is Clarke and Ambrosio’s report on Sir Charles Bell. Bell believed that to portray anatomical features of the human body, we must study these processes. That is, knowledge of the mechanisms and nature of the expressions should have a powerful significance to the painter” (Clarke & Ambrosio, p. 123). As I completed my drawing, I made sure to go over literature that I had studied in my lab on creating renderings of bipolar cells, and being able to understand the processes and the shapes of the cell body helped me to create my final product. I also thought of “The Optics of Ibn-Al-Haytham” because he gave descriptions of the functions of the eye that allowed the reader to understand the functions without looking at an image. This, I believe, is a very true version of objectivity, especially as it relates to those who cannot use sight to understand objectivity.
How do you engage with narratives about sensation, cognition, neuroscience, neurology, psychology, disability, and the emotions? How do you situate these narratives within histories of science and epistemology?
First, I picked this drawing because of how heavily it related to my neuroscience lab on dealing with bipolar cells in macaque retina. I read lots of literature and discussed with my PI the way cells in the retina connect and the overall structure of bipolar cells. This project also related heavily to neurology and disability because the researchers were particularly interested in macular degeneration. This made me think about how objectivity can expand beyond just vision, which is something I had not thought about before. When I think of anatomy, I automatically put pictures in my head, but I started to think about how describing the processes can help us understand anatomy and functions without vision, and also how these descriptions can improve our understanding with vision as well. As I created my piece, I focused on relying less on just looking at the image and dove into the literature to get an even better understanding of the anatomy of bipolar cells. As for emotions, I could tell that the moods of the music I played while I worked caused me to work slower or faster, which also might have played into how I interacted with the drawing. Based on all the subjective factors, like how we interpret certain images or pay attention to other senses around us, perhaps it is difficult to create an environment to be truly objective.
How do you expect to answer your questions?
For my questions about how I can better maintain objectivity, I was able to answer more of those as I went along in my drawing process. I was able to gain more confidence as I practiced and tried doodling beforehand to get a better feel of new techniques and new media that I was using. As for the deeper questions such as how Ramon y Cajal determined what is objective, I can dive further into his research and how we described how he turned what he saw under the microscope into a drawing. As for the question on what it means to be objective, I thought that I could look further into different imaging techniques and staining techniques to see when researchers use different stains over others and maybe some review papers about comparing different staining techniques to get an objective image of certain tissue. And for what objectivity means without sight, I thought about looking at other projects that deal with replicating without vision. I thought a good place to start would be musicians studying music by listening to it and replicating it through perfect pitch or playing out chords they hear on the piano. I think studying objectivity with sound would also be really fascinating!