↓ Skip to main content

A Practical Approach to Quantitative Processing and Analysis of Small Biological Structures by Fluorescent Imaging.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomolecular Techniques, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
A Practical Approach to Quantitative Processing and Analysis of Small Biological Structures by Fluorescent Imaging.
Published in
Journal of Biomolecular Techniques, May 2016
DOI 10.7171/jbt.16-2703-001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Standards in quantitative fluorescent imaging are vaguely recognized and receive insufficient discussion. A common best practice is to acquire images at Nyquist rate, where highest signal frequency is assumed to be the highest obtainable resolution of the imaging system. However, this particular standard is set to insure that all obtainable information is being collected. The objective of the current study was to demonstrate that for quantification purposes, these correctly set acquisition rates can be redundant; instead, linear size of the objects of interest can be used to calculate sufficient information density in the image. We describe optimized image acquisition parameters and unbiased methods for processing and quantification of medium-size cellular structures. Sections of rabbit aortas were immunohistochemically stained to identify and quantify sympathetic varicosities, >2 μm in diameter. Images were processed to reduce background noise and segment objects using free, open-access software. Calculations of the optimal sampling rate for the experiment were based on the size of the objects of interest. The effect of differing sampling rates and processing techniques on object quantification was demonstrated. Oversampling led to a substantial increase in file size, whereas undersampling hindered reliable quantification. Quantification of raw and incorrectly processed images generated false structures, misrepresenting the underlying data. The current study emphasizes the importance of defining image-acquisition parameters based on the structure(s) of interest. The proposed postacquisition processing steps effectively removed background and noise, allowed for reliable quantification, and eliminated user bias. This customizable, reliable method for background subtraction and structure quantification provides a reproducible tool for researchers across biologic disciplines.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 13 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Engineering 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 16 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 June 2026.
All research outputs
#7,300,572
of 34,365,356 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomolecular Techniques
#77
of 367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,140
of 339,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomolecular Techniques
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,365,356 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 367 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them