Localizing Microemboli within the Rodent Brain through Block-Face Imaging and Atlas Registration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Brain microinfarcts are prevalent in humans, however because of the inherent difficulty of identifying and localizing individual microinfarcts, brain-wide quantification is impractical. In mice, microinfarcts have been created by surgically introducing microemboli into the brain, but a major limitation of this model is the absence of automated methods to identify and localize individual occlusions. We present a novel and semi-automated workflow to identify the anatomic location of fluorescent emboli (microspheres) within the mouse brain through histologic processing and atlas registration. By incorporating vibratome block-face imaging with the QuickNII brain registration tool, we show that the anatomic location of microspheres can be accurately registered to brain structures within the Allen mouse brain (AMB) atlas (e.g., somatomotor areas, hippocampal region, visual areas, etc.). Compared with registering images of slide mounted sections to the AMB atlas, microsphere location was more accurately determined when block-face images were used. As a proof of principle, using this workflow we compared the distribution of microspheres within the brains of mice that were either perfused or immersion fixed. No significant effect of perfusion on total microsphere number or location was detected. In general, microspheres were distributed brain-wide, with the largest density found in the thalamus. In sum, our block-face imaging workflow enables efficient characterization of the widespread distribution of fluorescent microemboli, facilitating future investigation into the impact of microinfarct load and location on brain health.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".