↓ Skip to main content

MultiMap: A Tool to Automatically Extract and Analyse Spatial Microscopic Data From Large Stacks of Confocal Microscopy Images

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
MultiMap: A Tool to Automatically Extract and Analyse Spatial Microscopic Data From Large Stacks of Confocal Microscopy Images
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2018.00037
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gherardo Varando, Ruth Benavides-Piccione, Alberto Muñoz, Asta Kastanauskaite, Concha Bielza, Pedro Larrañaga, Javier DeFelipe

Abstract

The development of 3D visualization and reconstruction methods to analyse microscopic structures at different levels of resolutions is of great importance to define brain microorganization and connectivity. MultiMap is a new tool that allows the visualization, 3D segmentation and quantification of fluorescent structures selectively in the neuropil from large stacks of confocal microscopy images. The major contribution of this tool is the posibility to easily navigate and create regions of interest of any shape and size within a large brain area that will be automatically 3D segmented and quantified to determine the density of puncta in the neuropil. As a proof of concept, we focused on the analysis of glutamatergic and GABAergic presynaptic axon terminals in the mouse hippocampal region to demonstrate its use as a tool to provide putative excitatory and inhibitory synaptic maps. The segmentation and quantification method has been validated over expert labeled images of the mouse hippocampus and over two benchmark datasets, obtaining comparable results to the expert detections.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 25%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Computer Science 5 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,119,784
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#612
of 1,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,279
of 330,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#13
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 330,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 51% of its contemporaries.