Anatomical phenotyping in the brain and skull of a mutant mouse by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since genetically modified mice have become more common in biomedical research as models of human disease, a need has also grown for efficient and quantitative methods to assess mouse phenotype. One powerful means of phenotyping is characterization of anatomy in mutant vs. normal populations. Anatomical phenotyping requires visualization of structures in situ, quantification of complex shape differences between mouse populations, and detection of subtle or diffuse abnormalities during high-throughput survey work. These aims can be achieved with imaging techniques adapted from clinical radiology, such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. These imaging technologies provide an excellent nondestructive method for visualization of anatomy in live individuals or specimens. The computer-based analysis of these images then allows thorough anatomical characterizations. We present an automated method for analyzing multiple-image data sets. This method uses image registration to identify corresponding anatomy between control and mutant groups. Within- and between-group shape differences are used to map regions of significantly differing anatomy. These regions are highlighted and represented quantitatively by displacements and volume changes. This methodology is demonstrated for a partially characterized mouse mutation generated by N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea mutagenesis that is a putative model of the human syndrome oculodentodigital dysplasia, caused by point mutations in the gene encoding connexin 43.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".