We have used quantitative light microscopic autoradiographic techniques to analyze changes in muscarinic cholinergic receptors in the hippocampus in Alzheimer type dementia (ATD). The density and distribution of muscarinic cholinergic receptors has been correlated with the density of neurons, neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the CA1 subfield of the hippocampus of control and ATD patients. The number of pyramidal cells per mm2 in the CA1 sector was significantly decreased in ATD cases as compared to controls, although there were large variations among cases. The most marked reductions in cell counts were observed in patients with a history of profound dementia. The densities of muscarinic receptors, as well as the proportions of M1 and M2 subtypes, in the CA1 sector and dentate gyrus were not significantly different between ATD and old non-demented patients. Neuritic plaques, even in high numbers, did not affect the density of muscarinic receptors; moreover, the densities of receptors over the neuritic plaques did not differ from the surrounding neuropil. However, in some ATD cases there was a marked decrease in the concentration of these receptors in the CA1 sector and subiculum, with no change in the proportions of muscarinic receptor sybtypes. These patients exhibited frequent extracellular remnants of neurofibrillary tangles (ghost tangles), but scarce neuritic plaques, and were those showing severe losses of pyramidal cells. There was a significant positive correlation between the total concentration of muscarinic receptors in the CA1 and the density of pyramidal cells, suggesting that decreases in receptor concentration result from a severe neuronal loss. We observed that the ratio of muscarinic receptors per pyramidal cell was significantly increased in ATD patients. This might indicate a possible up-regulatory mechanism for muscarinic receptors in the population of remaining neurons in ATD However, decreases of receptor numbers following severe neuronal fall out suggest that compensatory mechanisms are no longer possible in such cases. The question is raised whether these differences between cases reflect different diseases or different stages of the same disease.