Differential performance of aqueous- and ethylic-Lugol's iodine stain to visualize anatomy in μCT-scanned vertebrates.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY
Hayley L Crowell, Ramon S Nagesan, Alison R Davis Rabosky, Matthew A Kolmann
{"title":"Differential performance of aqueous- and ethylic-Lugol's iodine stain to visualize anatomy in μCT-scanned vertebrates.","authors":"Hayley L Crowell, Ramon S Nagesan, Alison R Davis Rabosky, Matthew A Kolmann","doi":"10.1111/joa.14148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Museum specimens are an increasingly important tool for studying global biodiversity. With the advent of diffusible iodine-based contrast-enhanced computed tomography (diceCT), researchers can now visualize an organism's internal soft tissue anatomy without the need for physical dissection or other highly destructive sampling methods. However, there are many considerations when deciding which method of staining to use for diceCT to produce the best gray-scale contrast for facilitating downstream anatomical analyses. The general lack of direct comparisons among staining methodologies can make it difficult for researchers to determine which approaches are most appropriate for their study. Here, we compare the performance of ethylic-Lugol's iodine solution with aqueous-Lugol's staining solution across several vertebrate orders to assess differential imaging outcomes. We found that ethylic-Lugol's is better for visualizing muscle attachment to bone but provides overall lower contrast between soft tissue types. Comparatively, aqueous-based Lugol's provides high-contrast imaging among soft tissue types, although bone is more difficult to discern. We conclude that the choice of staining methodology largely depends on the type of anatomical data the researcher wishes to collect, and we provide a decision-based framework for assessing which staining methodology (ethylic or aqueous) is most appropriate for desired imaging results.</p>","PeriodicalId":14971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anatomy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anatomy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.14148","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Museum specimens are an increasingly important tool for studying global biodiversity. With the advent of diffusible iodine-based contrast-enhanced computed tomography (diceCT), researchers can now visualize an organism's internal soft tissue anatomy without the need for physical dissection or other highly destructive sampling methods. However, there are many considerations when deciding which method of staining to use for diceCT to produce the best gray-scale contrast for facilitating downstream anatomical analyses. The general lack of direct comparisons among staining methodologies can make it difficult for researchers to determine which approaches are most appropriate for their study. Here, we compare the performance of ethylic-Lugol's iodine solution with aqueous-Lugol's staining solution across several vertebrate orders to assess differential imaging outcomes. We found that ethylic-Lugol's is better for visualizing muscle attachment to bone but provides overall lower contrast between soft tissue types. Comparatively, aqueous-based Lugol's provides high-contrast imaging among soft tissue types, although bone is more difficult to discern. We conclude that the choice of staining methodology largely depends on the type of anatomical data the researcher wishes to collect, and we provide a decision-based framework for assessing which staining methodology (ethylic or aqueous) is most appropriate for desired imaging results.

水溶液和乙溶液-鲁戈尔碘染色法在观察μCT扫描脊椎动物解剖结构方面的性能差异。
博物馆标本是研究全球生物多样性日益重要的工具。随着基于可扩散碘的对比度增强计算机断层扫描(d diceCT)的出现,研究人员现在可以直观地看到生物体内部软组织的解剖结构,而无需进行物理解剖或采用其他破坏性很强的取样方法。然而,在决定使用哪种染色方法进行 diceCT 时,需要考虑很多因素,才能产生最佳的灰度对比,便于进行下游解剖分析。由于染色方法之间普遍缺乏直接比较,研究人员很难确定哪种方法最适合自己的研究。在这里,我们比较了乙溶液-鲁戈尔碘溶液和水溶液-鲁戈尔碘溶液在几种脊椎动物中的性能,以评估不同的成像结果。我们发现,乙溶液-鲁戈尔碘溶液能更好地观察肌肉与骨骼的附着情况,但软组织类型之间的总体对比度较低。相比之下,水基卢戈尔氏液在软组织类型之间的成像对比度较高,但骨骼更难分辨。我们的结论是,染色方法的选择在很大程度上取决于研究人员希望收集的解剖数据类型,我们提供了一个基于决策的框架,用于评估哪种染色方法(乙醇或水基)最适合所需的成像结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Anatomy
Journal of Anatomy 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Anatomy is an international peer-reviewed journal sponsored by the Anatomical Society. The journal publishes original papers, invited review articles and book reviews. Its main focus is to understand anatomy through an analysis of structure, function, development and evolution. Priority will be given to studies of that clearly articulate their relevance to the anatomical community. Focal areas include: experimental studies, contributions based on molecular and cell biology and on the application of modern imaging techniques and papers with novel methods or synthetic perspective on an anatomical system. Studies that are essentially descriptive anatomy are appropriate only if they communicate clearly a broader functional or evolutionary significance. You must clearly state the broader implications of your work in the abstract. We particularly welcome submissions in the following areas: Cell biology and tissue architecture Comparative functional morphology Developmental biology Evolutionary developmental biology Evolutionary morphology Functional human anatomy Integrative vertebrate paleontology Methodological innovations in anatomical research Musculoskeletal system Neuroanatomy and neurodegeneration Significant advances in anatomical education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信