ArticleScientific reports2020
Nanoscopic X-ray tomography for correlative microscopy of a small meiofaunal sea-cucumber.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification of Total Porosity from CT Images by Segmenting Unhydrated Cement: A Model-Informed Framework Integrating POWERS' Volume Model.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Fundamental questions in meiofauna research highlight how small but ubiquitous animals can improve our understanding of Nature.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Compact laboratory-based X-ray microscope enabling nondestructive 3D structure acquisition of mouse nephron with high speed and better user accessibility.Microscopy (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Exploring the macrostructural anatomy of dendrochirotid sea cucumber's (Echinodermata) calcareous rings under micro-computed tomography and its bearing on phylogeny.Journal of anatomy · 2021Article
- When SEM becomes a deceptive tool of analysis: the unexpected discovery of epidermal glands with stalked ducts on the ultimate legs of geophilomorph centipedes.Frontiers in zoology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the field of correlative microscopy, light and electron microscopy form a powerful combination for morphological analyses in zoology. Due to sample thickness limitations, these imaging techniques often require sectioning to investigate small animals and thereby suffer from various artefacts. A recently introduced nanoscopic X-ray computed tomography (NanoCT) setup has been used to image several biological objects, none that were, however, embedded into resin, which is prerequisite for a multitude of correlative applications. In this study, we assess the value of this NanoCT for correlative microscopy. For this purpose, we imaged a resin-embedded, meiofaunal sea cucumber with an approximate length of 1 mm, where microCT would yield only little information about the internal anatomy. The resulting NanoCT data exhibits isotropic 3D resolution, offers deeper insights into the 3D microstructure, and thereby allows for a complete morphological characterization. For comparative purposes, the specimen was sectioned subsequently to evaluate the NanoCT data versus serial sectioning light microscopy (ss-LM). To correct for mechanical instabilities and drift artefacts, we applied an alternative alignment procedure for CT reconstruction. We thereby achieve a level of detail on the subcellular scale comparable to ss-LM images in the sectioning plane.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.