几何形态计量学中手工和自动标记精度的比较:牛颅骨和远端指骨的研究

IF 1 4区 农林科学 Q4 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY
Tomasz Szara, Buket Çakar, Burak Ünal, Funda Yiğit
{"title":"几何形态计量学中手工和自动标记精度的比较:牛颅骨和远端指骨的研究","authors":"Tomasz Szara,&nbsp;Buket Çakar,&nbsp;Burak Ünal,&nbsp;Funda Yiğit","doi":"10.1111/ahe.70036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Geometric morphometric studies often rely on accurate landmark placement to analyse shape and size variations. Manual and automated landmarking methods are widely used, but their performance can vary depending on the anatomical structure and complexity. This study compares manual and automated landmarking accuracy in two anatomical samples: the skull and the distal phalanx. Fifteen Holstein cattle skulls and 15 distal phalanges were analysed. Two landmark configurations were used: 10 and 20 landmarks for the skull and 5 and 10 landmarks for the distal phalanx. Both manual and automated landmarking were performed using Slicer software. Procrustes distance and centroid size were calculated to assess shape and size differences. ANOVA was applied to evaluate statistical differences, and PCA was conducted to visualise shape variations. Procrustes distance revealed significant differences between manual and automated landmarking for most configurations, particularly in the skull, highlighting the variability introduced by automated methods. No significant differences were observed for centroid size, indicating consistency in size measurements. Automated landmarking showed increased variability in capturing shape, especially in complex structures and higher landmark densities. Automated landmarking provides efficiency but introduces significant shape variability, particularly in complex anatomical structures. Our findings highlight the superior accuracy of manual landmarking, particularly for capturing subtle anatomical features and complex structures where automated methods face challenges. Although more time-consuming, manual landmarking minimises variability and preserves crucial morphological details, making it essential for precise analysis, especially in the presence of thresholding artefacts in 3D models. Future research should explore multiple software platforms and refine automated algorithms to improve performance in morphometric analyses.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49290,"journal":{"name":"Anatomia Histologia Embryologia","volume":"54 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Manual and Automated Landmarking Accuracy in Geometric Morphometrics: A Study on Cattle Skulls and Distal Phalanges\",\"authors\":\"Tomasz Szara,&nbsp;Buket Çakar,&nbsp;Burak Ünal,&nbsp;Funda Yiğit\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ahe.70036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Geometric morphometric studies often rely on accurate landmark placement to analyse shape and size variations. Manual and automated landmarking methods are widely used, but their performance can vary depending on the anatomical structure and complexity. This study compares manual and automated landmarking accuracy in two anatomical samples: the skull and the distal phalanx. Fifteen Holstein cattle skulls and 15 distal phalanges were analysed. Two landmark configurations were used: 10 and 20 landmarks for the skull and 5 and 10 landmarks for the distal phalanx. Both manual and automated landmarking were performed using Slicer software. Procrustes distance and centroid size were calculated to assess shape and size differences. ANOVA was applied to evaluate statistical differences, and PCA was conducted to visualise shape variations. Procrustes distance revealed significant differences between manual and automated landmarking for most configurations, particularly in the skull, highlighting the variability introduced by automated methods. No significant differences were observed for centroid size, indicating consistency in size measurements. Automated landmarking showed increased variability in capturing shape, especially in complex structures and higher landmark densities. Automated landmarking provides efficiency but introduces significant shape variability, particularly in complex anatomical structures. Our findings highlight the superior accuracy of manual landmarking, particularly for capturing subtle anatomical features and complex structures where automated methods face challenges. Although more time-consuming, manual landmarking minimises variability and preserves crucial morphological details, making it essential for precise analysis, especially in the presence of thresholding artefacts in 3D models. Future research should explore multiple software platforms and refine automated algorithms to improve performance in morphometric analyses.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anatomia Histologia Embryologia\",\"volume\":\"54 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anatomia Histologia Embryologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ahe.70036\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatomia Histologia Embryologia","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ahe.70036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几何形态计量学研究通常依赖于精确的地标位置来分析形状和大小的变化。手动和自动标记方法被广泛使用,但它们的性能会因解剖结构和复杂程度而有所不同。本研究比较了手动和自动标记精度在两个解剖样本:颅骨和远端指骨。分析了15个荷斯坦牛颅骨和15个远端指骨。使用了两种标记配置:颅骨的10和20标记以及远端指骨的5和10标记。使用Slicer软件进行手动和自动地标标记。计算前列腺距离和质心大小来评估形状和大小的差异。方差分析用于评估统计差异,主成分分析用于可视化形状变化。普氏距离揭示了手动和自动标记在大多数配置中的显著差异,特别是在头骨中,突出了自动化方法引入的可变性。质心大小没有显著差异,表明尺寸测量的一致性。自动地标在捕获形状方面表现出增加的可变性,特别是在复杂结构和更高地标密度的情况下。自动标记提供了效率,但引入了显著的形状可变性,特别是在复杂的解剖结构。我们的研究结果强调了人工标记的优越准确性,特别是在捕捉微妙的解剖特征和复杂的结构时,自动化方法面临挑战。虽然更耗时,但手动标记可以最大限度地减少可变性并保留关键的形态细节,这对于精确分析至关重要,特别是在3D模型中存在阈值人工制品的情况下。未来的研究应该探索多种软件平台,完善自动化算法,以提高形态计量学分析的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Manual and Automated Landmarking Accuracy in Geometric Morphometrics: A Study on Cattle Skulls and Distal Phalanges

Geometric morphometric studies often rely on accurate landmark placement to analyse shape and size variations. Manual and automated landmarking methods are widely used, but their performance can vary depending on the anatomical structure and complexity. This study compares manual and automated landmarking accuracy in two anatomical samples: the skull and the distal phalanx. Fifteen Holstein cattle skulls and 15 distal phalanges were analysed. Two landmark configurations were used: 10 and 20 landmarks for the skull and 5 and 10 landmarks for the distal phalanx. Both manual and automated landmarking were performed using Slicer software. Procrustes distance and centroid size were calculated to assess shape and size differences. ANOVA was applied to evaluate statistical differences, and PCA was conducted to visualise shape variations. Procrustes distance revealed significant differences between manual and automated landmarking for most configurations, particularly in the skull, highlighting the variability introduced by automated methods. No significant differences were observed for centroid size, indicating consistency in size measurements. Automated landmarking showed increased variability in capturing shape, especially in complex structures and higher landmark densities. Automated landmarking provides efficiency but introduces significant shape variability, particularly in complex anatomical structures. Our findings highlight the superior accuracy of manual landmarking, particularly for capturing subtle anatomical features and complex structures where automated methods face challenges. Although more time-consuming, manual landmarking minimises variability and preserves crucial morphological details, making it essential for precise analysis, especially in the presence of thresholding artefacts in 3D models. Future research should explore multiple software platforms and refine automated algorithms to improve performance in morphometric analyses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anatomia Histologia Embryologia
Anatomia Histologia Embryologia ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY-VETERINARY SCIENCES
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
115
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia is a premier international forum for the latest research on descriptive, applied and clinical anatomy, histology, embryology, and related fields. Special emphasis is placed on the links between animal morphology and veterinary and experimental medicine, consequently studies on clinically relevant species will be given priority. The editors welcome papers on medical imaging and anatomical techniques. The journal is of vital interest to clinicians, zoologists, obstetricians, and researchers working in biotechnology. Contributions include reviews, original research articles, short communications and book reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信