Brushfield spots
small, white or grayish/brown spots on the periphery of the iris in the human eye
Brushfield spots are small, white or greyish/brown spots on the periphery of the iris in the human eye due to aggregation of connective tissue, a normal constituent of the iris stroma. The spots are named after the physician Thomas Brushfield, who first described them in his 1924 M.D. thesis.
Brushfield spots are a characteristic feature of the chromosomal condition Down syndrome or trisomy 21. They occur in 35–78% of newborn infants with Down syndrome. Brushfield spots tend to be obscured by pigmentation of the anterior border layer of the iris in patients with darker irides. Hence, they are much more likely to be observed in children with lightly pigmented eyes. Brushfield spots are more commonly found in people with Down syndrome of European descent than people with Down Syndrome of Asian heritage.
Brushfield spots comprise focal areas of iris stromal hyperplasia, surrounded by relative hypoplasia.
Similar spots described by Krückmann and Wolfflin are found in individuals without Down syndrome. Termed Krückmann-Wolfflin bodies, these spots typically are less well defined, fewer in number and more peripherally located than the Brushfield spots of trisomy 21.
“Brushfield spots” enters the record as small, white or grayish/brown spots on the periphery of the iris in the human eye. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Brushfield, spots and small can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Brushfield spots” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Brushfield, spots and small provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 30, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q962598. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1924.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Brushfield spots”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Brushfield spots primary sources, Brushfield spots archive and Brushfield research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Brushfield spots”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Brushfield spots” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.