Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39833126›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of comparative neurology2025

Comparing microCT Staining and Scanning Methodology for Brain Studies in Various Sizes of Spiders.

Vanessa Penna-Gonçalves, Nikolas J Willmott, Michael B J Kelly, Jay R Black, Elizabeth C Lowe, Marie E Herberstein

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of comparative neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Vanessa Penna-GonçalvesSchool of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7403-347X
Nikolas J WillmottSchool of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Michael B J KellySchool of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jay R BlackSchool of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Elizabeth C LoweSchool of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Marie E HerbersteinSchool of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Association for the Study of Animal BehaviourEnvironmental Microbiology Research InitiativeHolsworth Wildlife Research Endowment
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in microCT are facilitating the investigation of microstructures in spiders and insects leading to an increased number of studies investigating their neuroanatomy. Although microCT is a powerful tool, its effectiveness depends on appropriate tissue preparation and scan settings, particularly for soft, non-sclerotized tissues, such as muscles, organs, and neural tissues. As the application of microCT in spiders is only in its infancy, published protocols are often difficult to implement due to substantial size variation of the specimens. The present study was initiated to determine how to account for this variation. Our work builds on previous methods using microCT to image spider brains, with the aim to consolidate current knowledge and reduce time spent troubleshooting appropriate methodology, thereby facilitating future studies of spiders and their central nervous systems (CNS). We tested three different preparation and imaging techniques based on published protocols with minor modifications using 216 spiders with prosoma lengths ranging from 1.25 mm (small spiders) to 13.33 mm (large spiders). We compared the efficacy of the various specimen preparations, staining methods, and scan settings by categorizing the quality of dorsal and lateral microCT scans. We observed that only the phosphotungstic acid (PTA) staining agent resulted in complete staining of the prosoma and the CNS, allowing the CNS structures to be distinguished for small, medium, and large spiders. The use of image averaging, increased number of projections, image exposure timing, and detector binning did not greatly affect image quality for small and larger spiders but reduced noise. These settings did help improve image quality for medium spiders in conjunction with higher resolutions and an aluminum filter. We discussed the suitability of methods concerning spider size, effort, chemical risk, and image quality.

Indexed as

BrainSpidersStaining and LabelingX-Ray MicrotomographyAnimalsFemalebraincentral nervous systemmicroCTspidersstaining solution RRID:NCBITaxon_74971

Identifiers

PMID39833126
PMCPMC11937621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.