↓ Skip to main content

A univocal definition of the neuronal soma morphology using Gaussian mixture models

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
34 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.
Title
A univocal definition of the neuronal soma morphology using Gaussian mixture models
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2015.00137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergio Luengo-Sanchez, Concha Bielza, Ruth Benavides-Piccione, Isabel Fernaud-Espinosa, Javier DeFelipe, Pedro Larrañaga

Abstract

The definition of the soma is fuzzy, as there is no clear line demarcating the soma of the labeled neurons and the origin of the dendrites and axon. Thus, the morphometric analysis of the neuronal soma is highly subjective. In this paper, we provide a mathematical definition and an automatic segmentation method to delimit the neuronal soma. We applied this method to the characterization of pyramidal cells, which are the most abundant neurons in the cerebral cortex. Since there are no benchmarks with which to compare the proposed procedure, we validated the goodness of this automatic segmentation method against manual segmentation by neuroanatomists to set up a framework for comparison. We concluded that there were no significant differences between automatically and manually segmented somata, i.e., the proposed procedure segments the neurons similarly to how a neuroanatomist does. It also provides univocal, justifiable and objective cutoffs. Thus, this study is a means of characterizing pyramidal neurons in order to objectively compare the morphometry of the somata of these neurons in different cortical areas and species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 26%
Computer Science 6 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 March 2021.
All research outputs
#13,375,015
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#561
of 1,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,992
of 285,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 285,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.