Fermat's Library | An estimation of the number of cells in the human body annotated/explained version.

#### TL;DR How many cells are in your body? A simple question de...

Robert Hooke began the scientific study of cells, known as cell bio...

Yeasts are single-celled, eukaryotic - organisms whose cells have ...

> Since the cell number and cell size of various organs or systems,...

***Cell number might vary depending on gender, body height, body ma...

A ***gross estimation*** of the total human cell number was obtaine...

General estimations based on mean cell volume or weight have not pr...

Results for the total number of cells in the human as given by the ...

A more precise method than the gross estimation would be to sum the...

Their final estimate for the total number of human cells was:$$ 3.7...

2013

http://informahealthcare.com/ahb

ISSN: 0301-4460 (print), 1464-5033 (electronic)

Ann Hum Biol, 2013; 40(6): 463–471

2013 Informa UK Ltd. DOI: 10.3109/03014460.2013.807878

RESEARCH PAPER

An estimation of the number of cells in the human body

Eva Bianconi

, Allison Piovesan

, Federica Facchin

, Alina Beraudi

, Raffaella Casadei

, Flavia Frabetti

Lorenza Vitale

, Maria Chiara Pelleri

, Simone Tassani

, Francesco Piva

, Soledad Perez-Amodio

, Pierluigi Strippoli

and Silvia Canaider

Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy,

Medical Technology Lab, Prometeo Lab

(RIT), Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy,

Department for Life Quality Studies, University of Bologna, Rimini, Italy,

Institute of

Communication and Computer Systems, Athens, Greece,

Department of Specialized Clinical Sciences and Odontostomatology, School of Medicine,

Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy, and

Biomaterials for Regenerative Therapies Group, Institute for Bioengineering of Catalunya

(IBEC), Barcelona, Spain

Abstract

Background: All living organisms are made of individual and identifiable cells, whose number,

together with their size and type, ultimately defines the structure and functions of an organism.

While the total cell number of lower organisms is often known, it has not yet been defined in

higher organisms. In particular, the reported total cell number of a human being ranges

between 10

and 10

and it is widely mentioned without a proper reference.

Aim: To study and discuss the theoretical issue of the total number of cells that compose the

standard human adult organism.

Subjects and methods: A systematic calculation of the total cell number of the whole human

body and of the single organs was carried out using bibliographical and/or mathematical

approaches.

Results: A current estimation of human total cell number calculated for a variety of organs and

cell types is presented. These partial data correspond to a total number of 3.72 ! 10

Conclusions: Knowing the total cell number of the human body as well as of individual organs is

important from a cultural, biological, medical and comparative modelling point of view. The

presented cell count could be a starting point for a common effort to complete the total

calculation.

Keywords

Cell size, human cell number, organ, total cell

count, theoretical issue

History

Received 26 September 2012

Revised 19 March 2013

Accepted 9 May 2013

Published online 5 July 2013

Introduction

Since Schleiden’s and Schwann’s first formulations of cell

theory (Mazzarello, 1999), it has been known that all living

organisms are made of individual and identifiable cells,

whose size, number and type ultimately define the structure,

functions and size of an organism.

Cell size appears to be regulated by the amount of DNA

(ploidy): for example, the diploid yeast is larger than the

haploid one (Su & O’Farrell, 1998); cells in a tetraploid

salamander are twice the size of those in a diploid salaman-

der, although the corresponding organs in the two animals

have the same size, because the organisms of the tetraploid

salamander contain half as many cells as those of the diploid

(Conlon & Raff, 1999). Nevertheless, the issue of what kind

of relationship or signalling there is between cell size and

DNA content is still unresolved. It has been hypothesized that

there is a maximal protein-production rate from a genome

because there is an upper limit to gene transcription and

translation rates. Since proteins have a limited lifetime, there

is a maximal amount of protein-associated cell mass that can

be supported by a genome (Gomer, 2001). In size-control

mechanisms, even cell communication has a role in defining

specific organs, as reported by Depaepe et al. (2005).

Cell number, on the other hand, appears to be under strict

genetic and developmental control in lower organisms: for

example, bacteria and yeasts are composed of single cells,

while the adult Caenorhabditis elegans worm consists of

exactly 959 (male) or 1031 (ermaphrodite) somatic cells

(Alberts et al., 2002). In contrast, how cell number is

determined in higher organisms is not understood, although it

is presumably regulated by wider mechanisms of homeostasis

such as proliferation, differentiation and cell death. According

to this, Notch signalling can prolong precursor cell division

and can maintain stem cells in a self-renewing pattern of

division, thereby indirectly increasing the number of differ-

entiated cells that are ultimately produced (Conlon & Raff,

1999). There are currently several examples of secreted

factors that regulate tissue size, by both increasing and

limiting proliferation. Examples are myostatin, which regu-

lates skeletal muscle mass; leptin, which regulates the amount

of adipose tissue; growth hormone and insulin-like growth

Correspondence: Pierluigi Strippoli, De partment of Experimental,

Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, University of Bologna, Bologna,

Italy. Tel: +39 051 2094100. Fax: +39 051 20 94110 . E-mail:

pierluigi.strippoli@unibo.it

factors, which regulate total body mass (Roisin-Bouffay &

Gomer, 2004), and Hh-Gli signalling factors, which play a

central role in controlling precursor cell numbers in the brain

and other organs (Stecca & Ruiz i Altaba, 2009).

Some factors, such as insulin-signalling pathway, are

central in controlling cell number and size from worms to

humans, supporting the idea that key functions of the pathway

have been powerfully conserved through evolution (Moore,

2003). However, it has also been suggested that there may be

fundamental differences in the mechanisms by which mam-

mals and insects control their body size. This is the case

of c-myc, indicated as a crucial signal mediator: in mice its

reduction resulted in multi-organ hypoplasia, while

Drosophila c-myc mutants were found to be smaller because

of hypotrophy (Trumpp et al., 2001).

In complex organisms, composed of many billions of cells,

it is expected that control of cell number does not reach

precision at the level of single cells. However, at least a

defined order of magnitude in body cell number should be

conserved among humans, on the basis of several consider-

ations. First, although there are obvious differences in body

height and mass among adult individuals, these variations are

not greater than one order of magnitude and they may be due

to an increase in cell size along with or in absence of an

increase in cell number, such as in obesity (Avram et al.,

2007; Salans et al., 1973). In addition, analysis of cell number

at single organ or tissue level shows a considerable degree of

conservation among human organisms, i.e. blood cells count.

Biological experimental data point to an ‘‘organ-size check-

point’’ that generates organs of reproducible shape and size in

metazoans by regulating cell division, cell growth and

apoptosis, involving genes regulating patterning or controlling

cell adhesion and cell polarity (Leevers & McNeill, 2005).

Finally, consistency of basic molecular and cellular mechan-

isms for the development of an initial single cell (zygote) into

a complete organism with a reproducible anatomy and

physiology and conservation of these mechanisms through

evolution, suggest that a fine control of cell number is

exerted at genetic level in a similar manner for all individuals

of a certain species. In fact, there are clear physical

constraints on upper and lower limits of organism and organ

size, such as bone or heart mechanics and surface-to-volume

ratio, and biological mechanisms aimed at controlling

body and tissue cell number (Gomer, 2001; Hafen &

Stocker, 2003).

The aim of this work is to discuss the theoretical issue of

the total number of cells that compose the standard human

adult organism.

First, we noticed that these data were typically mentioned

in the literature without citing a reference; second, we

observed wide ranges among data reported by different

sources, ranging from 10

–10

We followed different lines of research in order to:

undertake a systematic survey of available information

about the number of cells of a human organism known to

date; assess this number using rough estimations for the body

as a whole; provide a framework and accurate count of

specific organs or cell types. In addition, we discuss the

relevance of this topic with regard to its applications in

biology and medicine, the complexity of deriving the total

cell number and, finally, we launch an international open

debate aimed at a final and documented solution of the

problem.

Materials and methods

Different approaches were used to retrieve all data available

to date on the total human cell number for a human being

or for a specific system/organ or cell type. Moreover, we

obtained useful data from the literature in order to calculate

the total cell number of specif ic system/organ or cell types

not yet known. Since the cell number and cell size of

various organs or systems, as well as the size of the organ

or system itself, may vary according to several parameters

such as age, sex, weight, pathology or evolutionary

adaptations, we searched for a single reference for the

‘‘average man’’ or ‘‘standard human being’’. Since this

does not exist, for the purposes of this work we chose a

30-year old young adult, weighing 70 kg, 1.72 m tall and

with a body area of 1.85 m

(Irving, 2007). When retrieved

data were different from this ‘‘average man’’ this was

indicated in the specific section.

Bibliographical search

In order to f ind primary literature articles with information

about the cell number of a human organism, we systematically

searched the PubMed database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

pubmed/). Searching for the MeSH term ‘‘Cell Count’’,

corresponding to ‘‘cell number’’, led to non-specific results

(more than 168 000 items found). The PubMed search was

therefore adjusted by using MeSH sub-headings and by

restricting results to Homo sapiens. The search was performed

using the expression: (‘‘Cell Count’’[Mesh] OR ‘‘cell

number’’) AND (‘‘Body Weights and Measures’’[Mesh] OR

‘‘Body Size’’[Mesh] OR ‘‘Body Constitution’’[Mesh] OR

‘‘Body Composition’’[Mesh]) AND ‘‘Humans’’[Mesh] AND

(1809[PDAT]: 2012/01/31[PDAT]). In addition, a search

including the explicit expression ‘‘cell number’’ along with

the terms ‘‘body’’ or ‘‘organism’’, limited to humans but not

including the MeSH sub-headings used above, was performed

in the title/abstract fields of PubMed. In this case the PubMed

query was: (Human[Title/Abstract] OR ‘‘Humans’’[Mesh])

AND (body[Title/Abstract] OR organism[Title/Abstract])

AND ‘‘cell number’’[Title/Abstract] AND (1809[PDAT]:

2012/01/31[PDAT]). Finally, a further search, not including

restriction to the presence of ‘‘body’’ or ‘‘organism’’ terms and

directed to the presence of the expression ‘‘cell number’’ in the

item title was performed by the query: ‘‘Cell number’’[TI]

AND human AND (1809[PDAT]: 2012/01/31[PDAT]).

At the same time, we performed a specific search of the

PubMed database with the purpose of finding primary

literature articles with information on how to calculate the

total cell number of a specific system/organ or cell type not

yet known.

The publication date of the articles searched ranged from

1809 to January 2012. Moreover, we reviewed printed

versions of available texts covering Biology, Genetics,

Histology, Anatomy, Physiology and other potentially useful

available printed sources. In addition, we searched for this

information in the main repositories of electronic versions of

464 E. Bianconi et al. Ann Hum Biol, 2013; 40(6): 463–471

books, NCBI Books (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/

entrez?db ¼ books) as well as of Google Books (http://

books.google.com/books), in their versions available up to

January 2012.

The NCBI Books collection includes many reference

textbooks widely used in the biomedical field. It was queried

using a general expression formulated according to the NCBI

Entrez query language: (‘‘Human body’’ OR ‘‘Human organ-

ism’’) AND (Cells OR ‘‘Cell number’’) or a specific request.

The Google Books collection includes books on any

subject whose text has been freely made totally or partially

available. It was searched by using the expression: (‘‘Human

body’’ OR ‘‘Human organism’’) (Cells OR ‘‘Cell number’’)

or a specific request.

The internet search engine Google was searched using

the expression: (‘‘Human body’’ OR ‘‘Human organism’’)

AND (Cells OR ‘‘Cell number’’) or a specific request.

Morphological estimation

It was possible to calculate cell volumes using an ultramicro-

scopic cell or an organ picture by the ‘‘solid revolution

method’’. First, we filtered the pictures in which the scale bar

was reported, the cell/organ was well magnified and its edge

was cleaned.

We plotted the Cartesian axes on the cell/organ picture so

that the axes origin was on the cell edge, the cell lay on the

positive abscissa and this axis split the cell into two identical

parts. We then traced bars with equal base size and

intersecting cell/organ edge in the middle of their top side

(Figure 1); the bars were built so that the sum of their areas

was, as much as possible, equal to the area of the cell/organ

contained in the first quadrant of the Cartesian axes.

An approximation of the cell/organ volume was obtained

by the following formula:

approx

i¼1

! # f ðx

# Dx

In order to attain a better approximation of the cell/organ

volume, we chose to sample the function f(x), that represents

the cell/organ edge, in the middle of each interval Dx.

Moreover we sub-divided the abscissa axis (the ‘‘a’’ segment

in Figure 1) laid upon the shape into n equal parts, each with

length . Finally, we re-scaled the cell/organ volume in cubic

micrometres.

Mathematical calculations

Most of the time, data obtained by previous described methods

required mathematical elaborations to find the total cell

number of a human being or the specific system/organ or a

cell type searched. Every time more than one datum was given,

the mean value and the corresponding errors (standard

deviation, SD) were reported alongside the value together

with the corresponding reference that reports them.

Furthermore, when cell size was necessary to perform the

calculation, we declared it in the organ-specific results section.

Moreover, a gross estimation of the total human cell

number was obtained by dividing the mass or volume of a

reference adult human body by the mass or volume,

respectively, of an average human cell.

Results

Estimation of the human total cell number in the

literature

We optimized the PubMed search in order to obtain useful

information about the composition of the human body in

terms of cell number.

The search strategies in PubMed database described in the

‘‘Bibliographical search’’ section led us to retr ieve 3407

articles. However, only two articles addressing the specific

issue of the global cell number in the human body were found

(see ‘‘Original article’’ in Appendix A, Table A1; online only).

Searches in printed books, in online NCBI and Google

Books gave useful estimations of total cell number in the

human body (see ‘‘Printed book’’ and ‘‘Online book’’ in

Appendix A, Table A1; online only).

None of these values were justified by primary literature

data and no citation source was available. Many websites

retrieved via Google search reported estimations for the

human whole body cell number. Due to criteria used by the

Google search engine, we consulted the first 100 results,

which led to estimations ranging from 5 ! 10

to 7 ! 10

with a single site reporting 2 ! 10

Excluding the results without an available primary source,

the estimation of the total human cell number, supported

by a bibliographical reference, ranges from 10

–10

with a modal value of 10

(see Figure 2 and Table A1 in

Appendix A; online only).

Gross estimation of the human total cell number by

mass and by volume

Although high variability in the size and weight of cells

from different normal tissues makes it difficult to choose

a reference for human cell weight and volume average

values, we assumed that a global compensation among body

regions exists.

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the cell image position in the

Cartesian axes. It was possible to calculate the cell volume by the ‘‘solid

revolution method’’ approximated by the summation formula, using an

ultramicroscope cell picture. In particular, Cartesian axes have to be

drawn on the cell image so that the x-axis is a symmetrical axis of the

cell, the upper half of the cell (represented by the curve line in the figure)

lies in the first quadrant and the cell edge intersects the origin of the

axes. Bars of identical width have to be drawn in the cell area included

between the cell edge and the x-axis, intersecting the cell edge in the

middle of their top side. In this manner the sum of the areas of all the

bars will approximate the area of this cell portion, while the cell volume

is obtained by measuring each bar height and inserting it in the

summation formula (see details in the ‘‘Morphological estimation’’

section).

DOI: 10.3109/03014460.2013.807878 Human cell number 465

Therefore, since the mean weight of a mammalian cell has

been estimated to be 1 ng (Makarieva et al., 2008), for a

standard body weight of 70 kg (Irving, 2007), there would be

7 ! 10

cells.

The mean volume of a mammalian cell has been estimated

to be 4 ! 10

(Alberts et al., 2002) (i.e. 4 pL). The

human body mean volume has been calculated by Nagao et al.

(1995) by two different physical methods: the obtained values

were 63.83 and 66.61 L. Considering the average value, the

resulting cell number is 1.63 ! 10

cells. Moreover, con-

sidering the body volume indicated by Irving (2007), equal to

60 ! 10

, the total human cell number resulted to be

1.50 ! 10

(Figure 2). However, if a single, 90 fL volume,

blood red cell were to be considered (Tønnesen et al., 1986),

this would translate into a larger number of total cells,

7.24 ! 10

On the other hand, the estimation of a mean volume of

6 pL for each endothelial cell and of a total number of

35 ! 10

human endothelial cells (Genest et al., 1983) would

result in an over-estimated body volume of 210 L.

Estimation of total cell number of specific systems,

organs or cell types

We present here results on the cell number of specific

systems, organs or cell types obtained to date with our

research.

Some of the values regarding the cell number of whole

human organs or cell type were obtained directly from an in-

depth bibliographical search. Other data on total cell number

of whole human organs or cell type needed integration

of some or all methods described above. We report below

these methods and results together for each of them (see

Appendix B, Table B1; online only).

Articular cartilages: Femoral condylar, humeral head

and trochlear surface of talus cartilage total cell

number

Articular cartilage cell number was calculated for some main

joints: the femoral condylar cartilage, the shoulder (humeral

head) and the ankle (trochlear surface of talus). Femoral,

humeral head and talus cartilage volumes have been reported

at 2503 ' 568 mm

(lateral femur cartilage), 2770 ' 536 mm

(medial femur cartilage) (Baysal et al., 2004),

4200 mm

' 1120 (Vanwanseele et al., 2004) and

3320 ' 550 mm

(Millington et al., 2007), respectively.

Femoral, humeral head and talus cartilage cell densities

have been reported at 14 100 ' 3200 cells/mm

, 14 600 cells/

and 12 150 cells/mm

(Stockwell, 1971), respectively.

Based on these data, the calculated cell numbers of two

femoral condyles, two humeral heads and two talus cartilages

were 1.49 ' 0.46 ! 10

, 1.23 ' 0.35 ! 10

, 8.06 ' 1.56 ! 10

respectively.

Biliary system: Gallbladder and biliary ducts

epithelium total cell number

The biliary system is composed of the gallbladder and biliary

ducts (Borley, 2005a).

We calculated the gallbladder internal surface (47.03 cm

by gallbladder inter nal volume (Irving, 2007) and size

(Borley, 2005a) assuming that it has a prolate spheroidal

shape. By dividing the estimated surface by the single cell

basal surface (29.20 ' 4.21 mm

), attained by mor phological

estimation (as described in the Methods section) from an

epithelium microimage (Wolf & Scarbrough, 2012), we

obtained the total number of gallbladder epithelium cells to

be 1.61 ' 0.23 ! 10

. Besides the columnar epithelium,

gallbladder width is composed of a sub-epithelial stroma

and complex smooth fibromuscolar layers. Sub-epithelial

stroma and smooth fibromuscolar layers volumes were

calculated by morphological estimation (Bergman et al.,

2004). We calculated the interstitial Cajal-like cells

(4.94 ' 0.05 ! 10

) and other stromal gallbladder cells

(8.48 ' 0.09 ! 10

) starting from data reported by Hinescu

et al. (2007). We then calculated the total myocytes cell

number (considering the maximum length and the minimum

diameter of each cell (Portincasa et al., 2004)) by dividing the

smooth fibromuscolar layer volume (2.80 ' 0.46 ! 10

)

by the single myocyte cell volume (1770 ' 350 mm

), obtain-

ing 1.58 ' 0.40 ! 10

cells.

As for to the biliary ducts, we were able to estimate the

total epithelial cell number of the extra hepatic ducts

(7.03 ' 5.30 ! 10

) by dividing the total surface of the ducts

(Castelain et al., 1993; Khalil et al., 2005) by the cylindr ical

epithelial cell basal surface.

Bones: Osteocytes total number

Since the total volume of bone tissue (BV) was not directly

measurable, it was necessary to compute it star ting from total

skeleton weight (TW), extrapolated from the literature

(Trotter, 1954; Seale, 1959). The amount of cortical and

trabecular tissue was also investigated (77% and 23%,

respectively) (Malluche & Faugere, 1986). Based on

Figure 2. Human total cell number comparison. *Total cell number

calculated for the whole organ; **total cell number calculated only for

some cell types of the organ.

466 E. Bianconi et al. Ann Hum Biol, 2013; 40(6): 463–471

micro-CT analysis, it was possible to obtain the average

porosity (bone volume over total volume fraction, BV/TV) of

both types of tissue and the correlation between bone porosity

and ash density (Tassani et al., 2011), defined as the ratio

between the bone weight and total geometrical volume of the

specimen, including empty spaces of porosity.

BV was computed as follows:

Ash Density ¼ m ! BV=TV þ b;

V ¼ TW ! Ash Density; and

V ¼ BV=TV ! T

where m is the slope of the linear regression (trabecular

1.04 g/cm

, cortical 1.15 g/cm

) and b is the intercept (0.03 g/

for both trabecular and cortical bone), R

¼ 0.97 for

trabecular bone and R

¼ 0.91 for cortical bone (Tassani et al.,

2011). BV/TV is measured as the average value for the

trabecular (13 ' 5%) and cortical (89 ' 11%) bone. Knowing

the average ash density (trabecular 0.16 ' 0.05 g/cm

, cor-

tical 1.06 ' 0.14 g/cm

) of the two types of tissue and their

dry TW which is 3939 ' 471 g (906 ' 108 g trabecular

and 3033 ' 363 g cortical) average from literature (Seale,

1959; Trotter, 1954), it is possible to compute total skel-

etal volume (T

V, trabecular 5618.04 ' 1931.49 cm

, cor-

tical 2916.85 ' 513.27 cm

) and total bone skeletal

volume (B

V, trabecular 722.56 ' 377.99 cm

, cortical

2602.17 ' 553.50 cm

The osteocyte (OCY) number estimated in a man less than

50 years old was expressed as a number for mm

of bone

surface (trabecular 98.97 ' 1.24 cells/mm

cortical

56.34 ' 1.69 cells/mm

) (Torres-Lagares et al., 2010). In

order to compute a volumetric analysis assuming bi-dimen-

sional cells distribution, a uniform distribution was hypothe-

sized. Therefore, linear density was first obtained (trabecular

9.95 ' 0.09 cells/mm, cortical 7.51 ' 0.16 cells/mm) and

finally the number of OCY for mm

was computed (trabecular

984.59 ' 21.37 cells/mm

, cortical 422.89 ' 21.97 cells/

). Consequently the OCY total numbers for whole bone

tissue is 7.11 ' 3.72 ! 10

, trabecular and 1.10 ' 0.24 ! 10

cortical.

Bone marrow total cell number

The number of bone marrow nucleated cells was 1.11 ! 10

(mean of 10 subjects, SD ¼ 5.25, count in rib sections) or

1.04 ! 10

(mean of the same 10 subjects, SD ¼ 3.36, count

in crest aspirates) per body kilograms (Harrison, 1962). Using

the average of the two values, we have an estimate of

7.53 ' 2.18 ! 10

cells for the reference weight of 70 kg

(Irving, 2007).

Liver total cell number

Since hepatic volume is 1470 cm

(Irving, 2007), hepatocyte

volume is 4900 mm

(Prothero, 1982) and the parenchimal cell

percentage of the total liver is 80% (Borley, 2005b), we

estimated the total hepatocyte cell number at 2.41 ! 10

Total stellate cells (2.41 ! 10

) were calculated as 1/10 of

hepatocyte cells (Geerts, 2001), while total Kupffer cells

(9.63 ! 10

) were obtained as 4-times the total stellate cells

(Dong et al., 2007). Therefore, the total cell number of the

liver is 3.61 ! 10

Nervous system: Glial cells total number

Since the total glial cells in the nervous system are 10–50

times the neurons (Kandel et al., 2000; Standring et al., 2005)

(for details, see Table B1 in Appendix B; online only), their

number is estimated as 3.00 ' 0.66 ! 10

Pancreas: Islet total cell number

The total number of islet cells (2.95 ' 0.78 ! 10

) was

calculated by multiplying the cell number per islet

1.56 ' 0.02 ! 10

(Pisania et al., 2010) and the mean

number of islets in the human pancreas equal to

1.89 ' 0.5 ! 10

(Meier et al., 2008).

Skin: Epidermal and dermal total cell number

We found the density of corneocytes, epidermal nucleate

cells, Langerhans cells and melanocytes in Hoath and Leahy

(2003). We obtained the relative total cell number by dividing

the standard human body surface (1.85 m

) (Irving, 2007) by

the specific density, to obtain an overall number of

1.76 ' 0.44 ! 10

cells. Epidermal Merkel cells resulted

3.62 ! 10

as 0.20–5.00% compared to the total epidermal

cells (Boulais & Misery, 2007). By dividing the human body

surface by the specific densities of fibroblasts (Randolph &

Simon, 1998) and mast cells (Grimbaldeston et al., 2000) we

obtained an overall of 1.85 ' 0.26 ! 10

dermal cells.

Therefore, the total dermal and epidermal cell number were

found to be 2.03 ' 0.30 ! 10

(for details, see Appendix B,

Table B1; online only).

Small intestine: Jejunum and ileum enterocytes total

number

To calculate the surface of the jejunum and the ileum of the

small intestine (0.35 m

), we considered them as two cylin-

ders. Their lengths and diameters are 2.00 m and 2.50 cm

(jejunum) and 3.00 m and 2.00 cm (ileum) (Borley, 2005c).

Then, considering the valvulae conniventes, the total surface

(1.04 m

) increases 3-fold (Teodori 1987). By an exact

graphyc reproduction (Cattaneo & Baratta, 1989), we

estimated 1000 ' 3.40 cells per villus. Knowing that there

are 13 ' 1 villi/mm

, the total number of cells covering them

is estimated at 1.35 ! 10

. The total number of cells covering

the cryptae is 3.24 ' 0.14 ! 10

if we consider that they

represent 12/50 of the cryptae covering each villus (Weiss &

Greep, 1981; Cattaneo & Baratta, 1989) and that the

estimated number of cryptae and villi is roughly the same

(Cattaneo & Baratta, 1989). Therefore, the total enterocyte

cell number was calculated to be 1.67 ' 0.71 ! 10

Supradrenal gland total cell number

Normal mean adrenal gland volumes have been reported to be

5.70 (SD ¼ 4.90 and 1.90 for the right and left gland,

respectively) in a study that considered a group of 52 men

with an average age of 48.4 years (Geraghty et al., 2004).

Cortex and medulla zones represent 90% and 10%, respect-

ively, of the total gland volume. Reticularis, fasciculata and

glomer ularis zones represent 7%, 78% and 15%, respectively,

of the cortex total volume (Martini 1994). Based on these data,

we calculated the volumes of the reticularis (0.36 cm

DOI: 10.3109/03014460.2013.807878 Human cell number 467

fasciculata (4.00 cm

), glomerularis (0.77 cm

) and medulla

(0.57 cm

) zones. Cell volumes of the fasciculata, glomerularis

and medulla zones were 1200, 870 and 970 mm

, respectively

(Bocian-Sobkowska et al., 1997). These data referred to new-

born humans, but cell size does not change in this organ during

lifetime (Staton et al., 2004). We calculated the radius

(6.25 mm) of the reticularis zone cells, described as round

shaped (Borley, 2005d), by a morphological analysis of a

microimage (Hui et al., 2009) and then the volume (1023 mm

Finally, by dividing the single zone into the specific cell type

volumes, we obtained the mean of the total cell number of the

single zones, reported in Table B1. The total cells of the two

supradrenal glands are 1.66 ' 0.16 ! 10

(for details, see

Appendix B, Table B1; online only).

Vessels: Total endothelial cell number

The endothelium is composed of roughly 50–70 mm long and

10–30 mm wide cells, which cover the internal layer of the

vessel (Fe

tou, 2011). To calculate the total endothelial cell

number, we used two different approaches to estimate the

vessel’s internal surface and we then divided it for a single

cell area. For systemic capillaries, superior and inferior vena

cava, we considered their length as 8.00 ! 10

cm (Loe &

Edwards, 2004), 7.00 cm (Testut & Latarjet, 1959; Johnson

et al., 2005), and 23.50 cm (Testut & Latarjet, 1959),

respectively, and their average diameter as 7.50 ! 10

& 4

(Loe & Edwards, 2004), 3.00 cm (Ganong, 2006; Germann

& Stanfield, 2006), respectively. For the other vessels, we

estimated their length by using the blood volume occupying

the vessels, their diameter and assuming vessels were

cylindrical (Ganong, 2006; Germann & Stanfield, 2006;

Guyton & Hall, 2002; Mountcastle, 1980; Rhoodes &

Planzer, 2004; Testut & Latarjet, 1959). The calculations

led to a total number of 2.54 ' 1.05 ! 10

endothelial cells.

Current estimation of human total cell number

Our current estimation of human total cell number was

calculated only on a variety of organs and cell types, as listed

in Appendix B, Table B1 (online only). These partial data

correspond to a total number of 3.72 ' 0.81 ! 10

(Figure 2).

This number invalidates previous references, at least those

indicating 10

as the human total cell number and creates the

starting point for a complete work that considers all the

components of the human body.

Discussion

The estimation of a reference cell count for the human whole

body was revealed to be not a trivial task. The results of our

bibliographical research show considerable variation in terms

of order of magnitude, which is not justifiable by inter-

individual differences (see Appendix A, Table A1; online

only). Furthermore, we noted a consistent lack of citations of

the original literature providing the pertinent data in printed

books, online available books and websites. This is not totally

unexpected, following our difficulties in retrieving articles

discussing this specific issue by systematic searches in the

PubMed database. General estimations based on mean cell

volume or weight have not proved to be reliable, due to the

high variability in cell size, volume and weight among

different cell types and, in turn, due to high variability in

cellularity for each cell type in the human organism.

The most reliable way to determine the human number of

cells seems to be to sum the cell counts for individual organs.

This also presents the advantage of providing valuable

reference data for the study of each part of the human

organism. Data about static, kinetic and pathological cell

counts for organs and systems have been produced in the

context of a wide variety of fields in biology and medicine.

We have shown here that in many cases a precise count may

be obtained from the literature. However, several problems

have emerged while conducting this analysis. First, a major

difficulty was estimation of the number of stromal and

accessory cells in tissues and organs for which, instead, an

accurate count of parenchymal cells has been performed.

Secondly, it was difficult to obtain data for diffuse systems,

e.g. vessels or nerves, both in their different section and in

their global dimensions. In fact, a systematic survey of the

whole biomedical literature is not a trivial exercise, because

the pertinent data may have often have been disclosed in the

context of a particular study.

Finally, different sources of variability in cell number may

hamper estimation of a general reference number. Some organ

or tissue cellularity varies in function of sex, age or

evolutionary adaptation, not only because of a pathological

condition. For instance, erythrocyte cell count differs in males

and females as well as during pregnancy and in populations

adapted to high-altitudes. However, this appears to be a minor

problem because it is expected that these variations do not

reach an order of magnitude and a mean estimation remains a

reasonable end-point for this research. As reported in our

current partial estimation of total cell number of the ‘‘average

man’’ (Irving, 2007) we have an SD equal to 0.81 ! 10

which is less than one order of magnitude.

We believe that knowledge of the cellularity of organs and

total body would be not only be culturally important but it

may also have biological and medical relevance, as demon-

strated by some key applications described below.

A quantitative model of development should explain how it

is possible to sustain a proliferation rate able to lead to a

whole human organism starting from a single cell. The wide

fields of cell growth and stem cell proliferation are potentially

included in this problem. Modelling of whole organs or

systems needs cell number data in order to produce afford-

able physiological views from the cells to the whole body.

For example, a recent report of ion transport by pulmon-

ary epithelia (Hollenhorst et al., 2011) cited quantitative

available data about the alveolar surface and cell number

(Crapo et al., 1982).

The determination of an organ or a tissue cell number is

relevant in medicine for diagnostic and prognostic proced-

ures. In fact, cellularity of biopsies leads to assessment of

specific pathologic states due to cell number deregulation.

For example, estimation of total number of hepatocytes in

cir rhotic patients gave a mean value of 1.72 ! 10

(Imamura

et al., 1991) in comparison with the mean value of 2.40 ! 10

reported by us for a healthy organ. In the case of blood cell

counts, accessibility of tissue and standardization of method-

ology has led to quantitative and qualitative characterization

468 E. Bianconi et al. Ann Hum Biol, 2013; 40(6): 463–471

of cell types and sub-types. In the same way, it would be

important to know the cell number of other tissues and organs,

along with the mechanisms regulating it, which could be

crucial in understanding the biology and kinetics of cancer

(Albanes & Winick, 1988), as well as the development of

many other human diseases. For instance, dysregulation of

organ size control has been implicated in diabetes and

hypertrophy (Yang & Xu, 2011) and trisomy 21, where the

relatively greater volume of the cell population of heart,

skeletal muscle, liver and brain is only a partial compensation

for the smaller cell number and not strong enough to produce

normal organ mass (Landing & Shankle, 1995). Moreover,

estimation of cellularity, organ and cell size of diseased

organs would benefit modern strategies of human biological

and disease research. In fact, the size of some organs can

decrease as a result of malnutrition and disease during

gestation or critical growth periods. For example, it has been

proposed that the number of adult nephrons may be

determined during renal development in utero and may be

related to foetal malnutrition (Barker, 1995; Lackland, 2005).

Finally, from an evolutionary point of view, data about cell

number in different species could allow a measure of

organism and organ complexity valuable in order to classify

and understand inter-species variability at phenotypic level

(Herculano-Houzel, 2011; Kothari et al., 1978). The formal

description of cell types and number of different organisms

could be valuable, in conjunction with other measures of

complexity such as gene number and function (Szathmary

et al., 2001), in order to develop better indices quantitatively

related to the ‘‘complexity’’ of an organism (Grizzi &

Chiriva-Internati, 2005).

Since we believe that the total human cell number may be

obtained by summing all data related to the single organs and

that the systematic work on each human section is complex

and requires a meticulous work, we believe that this issue is

an ideal candidate for a collaborative effort.

The problems outlined here could stimulate attainment and

publication of useful data worldwide, in order to provide a

systematic organ-by-organ view of human organism cellular-

ity and a final detailed estimation of the total cell number in a

standard human adult. Ideally, the last step could be

preparation of a forum paper and an on-line database resource

summarizing the complete picture by integrating data from

different expert contributors. With this aim, we release our

current estimations (Figure 2) so that they are available for

correction, integration and completion from any interested

researcher. These final results could be, in future develop-

ments, integrated into or related to formal description of

anatomical entities provided by ongoing attempts to formalize

anatomical data through the creation of ontologies (Baldock

& Burger, 2005; Hayamizu et al., 2005).

Conclusions

We have shown the importance and the usefulness of

searching for a reference number of the cells present in a

human body, providing hypotheses for a solution of the

problem. Our current estimation of 3.72 ! 10

cells for a

variety of organs and cell types is higher than some

estimations found in the literature. We believe that our initial

reference table for cell number in the human body, when

completed, possibly with a common effort, will have many

useful applications in all biomedical fields needing quantita-

tive measurement in order to build structural, functional,

pathological and comparative models of human organs and of

the whole body.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Paolo Comeglio and Lucia Mancini for

helping with the revision of the manuscript.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are

responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

This work was partially supported by a Marie Curie Intra

European Fellowship within the 7th European Community

Framework Programme (project number: PIEF-GA-2009-253924;

acronym: MOSAIC).

References

Adler CP, Costabel U. 1975. Cell number in human heart in atrophy,

hypertrophy, and under the influence of cytostatics. Recent Adv Stud

Cardiac Struct Metab 6:343–355.

Albanes D, Winick M. 1988. Are cell number and cell proliferation risk

factors for cancer? J Natl Cancer Inst 80:772–774.

Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Walter P. 2002.

Molecular biology of the cell. 4th ed. New York: Garland Science.

Asimov I. 1963. The human body: its structure and operation. Boston,

MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Avram MM, Avram AS, James WD. 2007. Subcutaneous fat in normal

and diseased states 3. Adipogenesis: from stem cell to fat cell. J Am

Acad Dermatol 56:472–492.

Baldock R, Burger A. 2005. Anatomical ontologies: names and places in

biology. Genome Biol 6:108.

Barker DJ. 1995. Intrauterine programming of adult disease. Mol Med

Today 1:418–423.

Baron S. 1996. Medical microbiology. Galveston, TX: University of

Texas Medical Branch.

Baserga R. 1985. The Biology of cell reproduction. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press.

Baysal O, Baysal T, Alkan A, Altay Z, Yologlu S. 2004. Comparison of

MRI graded cartilage and MRI based volume measurement in knee

osteoarthr itis. Swiss Med Wkly 134:283–288.

Bergman RA, Afifi AK, Jew JJ, Reimann PC. 2004. Anatomy atlases.

Atlas of microscopic anatomy: section 10 – Digestive System.

Available online at: http://www.anatomyatlases.org/Microscopic

Anatomy/Section10/Plate10220.shtml (accessed May 2012).

Bocian-Sobkowska J, Malendowicz LK, Woz

niak W. 1997. Comparative

stereological studies on zonation and cellular composition of adrenal

glands of normal and anencephalic human fetuses. II. Cellular

composition of the gland. Histol Histopathol 12:391–399.

Boncinelli E. 2007. Prima lezione di Biologia. Roma: Laterza.

Borley NR. 2005a. Gallbladder and biliary tree. In: Gray H, Standring S,

editors. Gray’s Anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice.

39th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill Livingston.

p 1227–1230.

Borley NR. 2005b. Liver. In: Gray H, Standring S, editors. Gray’s

Anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. 39th ed.

Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill Livingston. p 1213–1226.

Borley NR. 2005c. Jejunum and ileum. In: Gray H, Standring S, editors.

Gray’s Anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. 39th ed.

Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill Livingston. p 1167–1172.

Borley NR. 2005d. Supradrenal (adrenal) gland. In: Gray H, Standring S,

editors. Gray’s Anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice.

39th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill Livingston.

p 1245–1249.

Boulais N, Misery L. 2007. Merkel cells. J Am Acad Dermatol 57:

147–165.

Brown TA. 2002. Genomes. Oxford: Wiley-Liss.

DOI: 10.3109/03014460.2013.807878 Human cell number 469

Bry L, Kelly K, Sethi RJ. 1995. MadSci Network, anatomy. Available

online at: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2001-02/981770369.

An.r.html (accessed Feb 2011).

Castelain M, Grimaldi C, Harris AG, Caroli-Bosc FX, Hastier P, Dumas

R, Delmont JP. 1993. Relationship between cystic duct diameter and

the presence of cholelithiasis. Dig Dis Sci 38:2220–2224.

Cattaneo L, Baratta L. 1989. Stereogrammi di anatomia dell’uomo:

aspetti istologici e molecolari, Vol. 3. Origgio: Ciba-Geigy Edizioni.

Claybourne A. 2006. The human body. London: Evans Brothers.

Conlon I, Raff M. 1999. Size control in animal development. Cell 96:

235–244.

Cooper GM. 2000. The Cell: a molecular approach. Sunderland: Sinauer

Associates.

Cox AJ. 1952. Stomach size and its relation to chronic peptic ulcer.

AMA Arch Pathol 54:407–422.

Crapo JD, Barry BE, Gehr P, Bachofen M, Weibel ER. 1982. Cell

number and cell characteristics of the normal human lung. Am Rev

Respir Dis 125:740–745.

Depaepe V, Suarez-Gonzalez N, Dufour A, Passante L, Gorski JA, Jones

KR, Ledent C, Vanderhaeghen P. 2005. Ephrin signalling controls

brain size by regulating apoptosis of neural progenitors. Nature 435:

1244–1250.

Dong Z, Wei H, Sun R, Tian Z. 2007. The roles of innate immune

cells in liver injury and regeneration. Cell Mol Immunol 4:

241–252.

Ehrenfeucht A, Harju T, Petre I, Prescott DM, Rozenberg G. 2004.

Computation in living cells: gene assembly in ciliates. New York:

Springer.

E-Notes Study Matter. 2011. How many cells are in the human body?

Available online at: http://www.enotes.com/science-fact-finder/

human-body/how-many-cells-human-body (accessed Feb 2011).

tou M. 2011. The Endothelium, part 1: multiple functions of the

endothelial cells. Focus on endothelium-derived vasoactive mediators.

San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool Life Sciences.

Frank SA. 2007. Dynamics of cancer: incidence, inheritan ce, and

evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Freitas RA. 1999. Nanomedicine, Vol 1: basic capabilities. Austin, TX:

Landes Bioscience.

Ganong WF. 2006. Fisiologia Medica. Padova: Piccin.

Geerts A. 2001. Histor y, heterogeneity, developmental biology, and

functions of quiescent hepatic stellate cells. Semin Liver Dis 21:

311–335.

Genest J, Kuchel O, Hamet P, Cantin M, editors. 1983. Hypertension.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Geraghty EM, Boone JM, McGahan JP, Jain K. 2004. Normal organ

volume assessment from abdominal CT. Abdom Imaging 29:482–490.

Germann WJ, Stanfield CL. 2006. Fisiologia. Napoli: EdiSES.

Gibson WG, Peng TC, Croker BP. 1982. Age-associated C-cell

hyperplasia in the human thyroid. Am J Pathol 106:388–393.

Gomer RH. 2001. Not being the wrong size. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2:

48–54.

Goodsell DS. 2010. The machinery of Life. New York: Springer.

Griffiths AJF, Gelbart WM, Miller JH, Lewontin RC. 1999. Modern

genetic analysis. New York: WH Freeman.

Griffiths AJF, Miller JH, Suzuki DT, Lewontin RC, Gelbart WM. 2000.

An introduction to genetic analysis. New York: WH Freeman.

Grimbaldeston MA, Skov L, Baadsgaard O, Skov BG, Marshman G,

Finlay-Jones JJ, Hart PH. 2000. Communications: high der mal mast

cell prevalence is a predisposing factor for basal cell carcinoma in

humans. J Invest Dermatol 115:317–320.

Grizzi F, Chiriva-Internati M. 2005. The complexity of anatomical

systems. Theor Biol Med Model 2:26–34.

Guyton AC, Hall JE. 2002. Fisiologia medica II. Napoli: EdiSES.

Hafen E, Stocker H. 2003. How are the sizes of cells, organs, and bodies

controlled? PLoS Biol 1:319–323. Article ID e86.

Hanslmeier A. 2009. Habitability and cosmic catastrophes. Berlin and

Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag and GmbH & Co K.

Harr ison WJ. 1962. The total cellularity of the bone marrow in man.

J Clin Pathol 15:254–259.

Hayamizu TF, Mangan M, Corradi JP, Kadin JA, Ringwald M. 2005.

The Adult Mouse Anatomical Dictionary: a tool for annotating and

integrating data. Genome Biol 6(3):R29.

Herculano-Houzel S. 2011. Not all brains are made the same: new views

on brain scaling in evolution. Brain Behav Evol 78:22–36.

Hinescu ME, Ardeleanu C, Gherghiceanu M, Popescu LM. 2007.

Interstitial Cajal-like cells in human gallbladder. J Mol Histol 38:

275–284.

Hoath SB, Leahy DG. 2003. The organization of human epidermis:

functional epidermal units and phi propor tionality. J Invest Dermatol

121:1440–1446.

Hollenhorst MI, Richter K, Fronius M. 2011. Ion transport by pulmonary

epithelia. J Biomed Biotechnol 2011:174306.

Hood L, Galas D. 2003. The digital code of DNA. Nature 421:444–448.

Howell WH, Fulton JF. 1949. A textbook of physiology. Philadelphia,

PA: WB Saunders.

Hui XG, Akahira J, Suzuki T, Nio M, Nakamura Y, Suzuki H, Rainey

WE, Sasano H. 2009. Development of the human adrenal zona

reticularis: morphometricand immunohistochemical studies from birth

to adolescence. J Endocrinol 203:241–252.

Imamura H, Kawasaki S, Shiga J, Bandai Y, Sanjo K, Idezuki Y. 1991.

Quantitative evaluation of parenchymal liver cell volume and total

hepatocyte number in cirrhotic patients. Hepatology 14:448–453.

Irving PH. 2007. The physics of the human body: a physical view of

physiology biological and medical physics, biomedical engineering.

New York: Springer.

Johnson D, Shah P, Collins P, Wigley C. 2005. Hearth and great vessels.

Nervous system. In: Gray H, Standring S, editors. Gray’s Anatomy:

the anatomical basis of clinical practice. 39th ed. Philadelphia, PA:

Elsevier Churchill Livingston. p 995–1028.

Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessel TM. 2000. Principles of neural science.

4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Health Professions Division.

Khalil MM, Islam MN, Khalil MM, Khan ZI, Adiluzzaman AA, Hossain

MI. 2005. Topography and morphometry of the common bile duct and

major duodenal papilla of man and principal domesticated animals.

Mymensingh Med J 14:6–12.

Kothari LK, Patni MK, Jain ML. 1978. The total Leydig cell volume of

the testis in some common mammals. Andrologia 10:218–222.

Lackland DT. 2005. Mechanisms and fetal origins of kidney disease.

J Am Soc Nephrol 16:2531–2532.

Landing BH, Shankle WR. 1995. Considerations of quantitative data on

organ sizes and cell numbers and sizes in Down syndrome. Prog Clin

Biol Res 393:177–191.

Leevers SJ, McNeill H. 2005. Controlling the size of organs and

organisms. Curr Opin Cell Biol 17:604–660.

Lodish H, Berk A, Zipursky LS, Matsudaira P, Baltimore D, Darnell J.

2000. Molecular cell biology. New York: WH Freeman.

Loe MJ, Edwards WD. 2004. A light-hearted look at a lion-hearted organ

or, a perspective from three standard deviations beyond the norm.

Part 1 of 2 parts. Cardiovasc Pathol 13:282–292.

Makarieva AM, Gorshkov VG, Li BL, Chown SL, Reich PB, Gavrilov

VM. 2008. Mean mass-specific metabolic rates are strikingly similar

across life’s major domains: evidence for life’s metabolic optimum.

Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:16994–16999.

Malluche HH, Faugere MC. 1986. Atlas of mineralized bone histology.

New York: Karger.

Martini F. 1994. Fondamenti di anatomia e fisiologia. Napoli: EdiSES.

Mazzarello P. 1999. A unifying concept: the history of cell theory. Nat

Cell Biol 1:E13–15.

Meier JJ, Butler AE, Saisho Y, Monchamp T, Galasso R, Bhushan A,

Rizza RA, Butler PC. 2008. b-cell replication is the primary

mechanism subserving the postnatal expansion of b-cell mass in

humans. Diabetes 57:1584–1594.

Mercer RR, Russell ML, Roggli VL, Crapo JD. 1994. Cell number and

distribution in human and rat airways. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 10:

613–624.

Millington SA, Grabner M, Wozelka R, Anderson DD, Hurwitz SR,

Crandall JR. 2007. Quantification of ankle articular cartilage topog-

raphy and thickness using a high resolution stereophotography system.

Osteoarthr Cartilage 15:205–211.

Moore P. 2003. Controlling how many cells make a fly. J Biol 2:16.

Morgan JE, Partridge TA. 2003. Muscle satellite cells. Int J Biochem

Cell Biol 35:1151–1156.

Mountcastle VB, editor. 1980. Medical physiology. St Louis, Toronto;

London: The C.V. Mosby Co.

Nagao N, Tamaki K, Kuchiki T, Nagao M. 1995. A new gas dilution

method for measuring body volume. Br J Sports Med 29:134–138.

Naik SR, Bajaj SC, Goyal RK, Gupta DN, Chuttani HK. 1971. Parietal

cell mass in healthy human stomach. Gastroenterology 61:682–685.

470 E. Bianconi et al. Ann Hum Biol, 2013; 40(6): 463–471

National Institutes of Health. 2007. Biological Sciences Curriculum

Study. NIH curriculum supplement series internet. Bethesda, MD:

National Institutes of Health US.

New Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1976. New encyclopaedia britannica,

volume 6. Tucson, AZ: William Benton Pub.

Pisania A, Weir GC, O’Neil JJ, Omer A, Tchipashvili V, Lei J, Colton

CK, Bonner-Weir S. 2010. Quantitative analysis of cell composition

and purity of human pancreatic islet preparations. Lab Invest 90:

1661–1675.

Pittman RN. 2011. Regulation of tissue oxygenation. San Rafael, CA:

Morgan & Claypool Life Sciences.

Portincasa P, Di Ciaula A, vanBerge-Henegouwen GP. 2004. Smooth

muscle function and dysfunction in gallbladder disease. Curr

Gastroenterol Rep 6:151–162.

Prothero JW. 1982. Organ scaling in mammals: the liver. Comp Biochem

Physiol A Comp Physiol 71:567–577.

Purves D, Augustine GJ, Fitzpatrick D, Katz LC, LaMantia AS,

McNamara JO, Williams SM. 2001. Neuroscience. Sunderland:

Sinauer Associates.

Randolph RK, Simon M. 1998. Dermal fibroblasts actively metabolize

retinoic acid but not retinol. J Invest Dermatol 111:478–484.

Ratner BD, Bankman I. 2009. Biomedical engineering desk reference.

Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Academic Press.

Rhoodes R, Planzer R. 2004. Fisiologia generale e umana. Padova:

Piccin.

Roisin-Bouffay C, Gomer RH. 2004. How to reach the right size? Med

Sci Paris 20:219–224.

Royston CM, Polak J, Bloom SR, Cooke WM, Russell RC, Pearse AG,

Spencer J, Welbourn RB, Baron JH. 1978. G cell population of the

gastric antrum, plasma gastrin, and gastric acid secretion in patients

with and without duodenal ulcer. Gut 19:689–698.

Salans LB, Cushman SW, Weismann RE. 1973. Studies of human

adipose tissue. Adipose cell size and number in nonobese and obese

patients. J Clin Invest 52:929–941.

Samaras T, Bartke A, Rollo CD. 2007. Human body size and the laws of

scaling: physiological, performance, growth, longevity and ecological

ramifications. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Seale RU. 1959. The weight of the dry fat-free skeleton of American

whites and Negroes. Am J Phys Anthropol 17:37–48.

Spalding KL, Arner E, Westermark PO, Bernard S, Buchholz BA,

Bergmann O, Blomqvist L, Hoffstedt J, Na

slund E, Britton T, Concha

H, Hassan M, Ryde

n M, Frise

n J, Ar ner P. 2008. Dynamics of fat cell

turnover in humans. Nature 453:783–787.

Standring S, Wigley C, Collins P, Williams A. 2005. Nervous system. In:

Gray H, Standring S, editors. Gray’s Anatomy: the anatomical basis of

clinical practice. 39th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill

Livingston. p 443–468.

Staton BA, Mixon RL, Dharia S, Brissie RM, Parker Jr CR,. 2004. Is

reduced cell size the mechanism for shrinkage of the adrenal zona

reticularis in aging? Endocr Res 30:529–534.

Stecca B, Ruiz i Altaba A. 2009. A GLI1-p53 inhibitory loop

controls neural stem cell and tumour cell numbers. EMBO J 28:

663–676.

Steffes MW, Schmidt D, McCrery R, Basgen JM, International

Diabetic Nephropathy Study Group. 2001. Glomer ular cell number

in normal subjects and in type 1 diabetic patients. Kidney Int 59:

2104–2113.

Stock W, Hoffman R. 2000. White blood cells 1: non-malignant

disorders. Lancet 355:1351–1357.

Stockwell RA. 1971. The interrelationship of cell density and cartilage

thickness in mammalian articular cartilage. J Anat 109:411–421.

Stone KC, Mercer RR, Gehr P, Stockstill B, Crapo JD. 1992. Allometric

relationship of cell numbers and size in the mammalian lung. Am J

Respir Cell Mol Biol 6:235–243.

Strachan T, Read AP. 1999. Human molecular genetics. New York:

Wiley-Liss.

Su TT, O’Farrell PH. 1998. Size control: cell proliferation does not equal

growth. Curr Biol 8:R687–689.

Swenson RA. 2000. More than meets the eye: fascinating glimpses of

god’s power and design. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.

Szathmary E, Jordan F, Pal C. 2001. Can genes explain biological

complexity? Science 292:1315–1316.

Tassani S, Ohman C, Baruffaldi F, Baleani M, Viceconti M. 2011.

Volume to density relation in adult human bone tissue. J Biomech 44:

103–108.

Teodori U. 1987. Trattato di Medicina Interna. Roma: Societa

Editrice

Universo.

Testut L, Latarjet A. 1959. Trattato di anatomia umana. Torino: Unione

Tipografica Editrice Torinese.

The Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh. 2011. The handy science answer

book. Canton: Visible Ink Press.

Tønnesen H, Hejberg L, Frobenius S, Andersen J. 1986. Erythrocyte

mean cell volume-correlation to drinking pattern in heavy alcoholics.

Acta Med Scand 219:515–518.

Torres-Lagares D, Tulasne JF, Pouget C, Llorens A, Saffar JL, Lesclous

P. 2010. Structure and remodelling of the human parietal bone: an age

and gender histomorphometric study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 38:

325–330.

Trotter M. 1954. A preliminary study of estimation of weight of the

skeleton. Am J Phys Anthropol 12:537–551.

Trumpp A, Refaeli Y, Oskarsson T, Gasser S, Martin GR, Bishop JM.

2001. C-Myc regulates mammalian body size by controlling cell

number but not cell size. Nature 414:768–773.

Van Amerongen C, Trad C, Van Amerongen A. 1979. The Way Things

work book of the body. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Vanwanseele B, Eckstein F, Hadwighorst H, Knecht H, Spaepen A,

Stu

ssi E. 2004. In vivo precision of quantitative shoulder cartilage

measurements, and changes after spinal cord injur y. Magn Reson Med

51:1026–1030.

Weiss L, Greep RO. 1981. Istologia. Bologna: Zanichelli.

Williams RW, Herrup K. 1988. The control of neuron number. Annu Rev

Neurosci 11:423–453.

Wolf M, Scarbrough M. 2012. The JayDoc HistoWeb. GI system, 39,

Gall Bladder. Available online at: http://www.kumc.edu/instruction/

medicine/anatomy/histoweb/gitract/gi39.htm (accessed May 2012).

Yang X, Xu T. 2011. Molecular mechanism of size control in

development and human diseases. Cell Res 21:715–729.

Young B, Heath JW. 2001. Wheater(‘s) Istologia e anatomia micro-

scopica. Milano: Casa Editrice Ambrosiana.

Zweiger G. 2002. Genomica. Columbus, OH: Mc-Graw Hill.

Apendix available online

Appendix Table A1 and B1

Notice of Correction:

The iFirst version of this article published online ahead of print on 05 July 2013 contained errors on pages 4 and 6. On page 4,

(Figure 2) ‘‘3.49’’ should have read ‘‘3.72’’ and ‘‘4.94 ' 0.04’’ should have read ‘‘4.94 ' 0.05’’. On page 6, ‘‘1.03 ' 0.16’’ should

have read ‘‘1.66 ' 0.16’’ and ‘‘2.03 ' 1.05’’ should have read ‘‘2.54 ' 1.05’’. The corrected version is shown in this issue.

DOI: 10.3109/03014460.2013.807878 Human cell number 471

Discussion

A more precise method than the gross estimation would be to sum the cell counts for individual organs. This method has another advantage which is to provide valuable reference data for the study of each part of the human organism. The determination of the number of cells in the human body is determined with higher accuracy using this method. Robert Hooke began the scientific study of cells, known as cell biology in the 17th century. In 1839 Matthias Schleiden and Theodor Schwann introduced the idea that cells are the fundamental unit of life - cell theory. Cell theory states that living organisms are made up of cells, that they are the basic structural unit of all organisms, and that all cells come from pre-existing cells. ***Cells are the basic unit of structure in all organisms and also the basic unit of reproduction.*** !["cell theory"](https://i.imgur.com/2RY1CD2.png) *Robert Hooke's microscope* General estimations based on mean cell volume or weight have not proved to be reliable because of a high variability in cell size, volume and weight among different cell types. A ***gross estimation*** of the total human cell number was obtained by dividing the mass/volume of a reference adult human body by the mass/volume of an average human cell. The final result was for the total number of cell in the human body was $\sim 10^{13}$ cells. Their final estimate for the total number of human cells was:$$ 3.72 \pm 􏰃 0.81\times􏰁 10^{13} $$ Results for the total number of cells in the human as given by the different methods discussed in this paper. #### TL;DR How many cells are in your body? A simple question deserves a simple answer. Unfortunately things are not that simple. The reported total cell number of a human being ranges between $10^{12}$ and $10^{16}$ and it is widely mentioned without a proper reference. This paper discusses the theoretical issue of the total number of cells that compose the standard human adult organism and provides a systematic calculation of the total cell number of the whole human body and of the single organs. The most reliable way to determine the human number of cells seems to be to sum the cell counts for individual organs. The authors found a total number of $3.72 \times􏰁 10^{13}$ Yeasts are single-celled, eukaryotic - organisms whose cells have a nucleus enclosed within membranes - microorganisms classified as members of the fungus kingdom !["yeast"](https://i.imgur.com/XJJaAnU.png) ***Cell number might vary depending on gender, body height, body mass etc... *** There are differences but these variations are not greater than one order of magnitude. > Since the cell number and cell size of various organs or systems, as well as the size of the organ or system itself, may vary according to several parameters such as age, sex, weight, pathology or evolutionary adaptations, we searched for a single reference for the ***‘‘average man’’ or ‘‘standard human being’’.*** Since this does not exist, for the purposes of this work ***we chose a 30-year old young adult, weighing 70kg, 1.72m tall and with a body area of 1.85 $m^2$*** A ***gross estimation*** of the total human cell number was obtained by dividing the mass/volume of a reference adult human body by the mass/volume of an average human cell. The final result was $\sim 10^{13}$ cells.

Comments

Products

Project