Literature DB >> 26589938

Morphometrics, 3D Imaging, and Craniofacial Development.

Benedikt Hallgrimsson1, Christopher J Percival2, Rebecca Green2, Nathan M Young3, Washington Mio4, Ralph Marcucio3.   

Abstract

Recent studies have shown how volumetric imaging and morphometrics can add significantly to our understanding of morphogenesis, the developmental basis for variation, and the etiology of structural birth defects. On the other hand, the complex questions and diverse imaging data in developmental biology present morphometrics with more complex challenges than applications in virtually any other field. Meeting these challenges is necessary in order to understand the mechanistic basis for variation in complex morphologies. This chapter reviews the methods and theory that enable the application of modern landmark-based morphometrics to developmental biology and craniofacial development, in particular. We discuss the theoretical foundations of morphometrics as applied to development and review the basic approaches to the quantification of morphology. Focusing on geometric morphometrics, we discuss the principal statistical methods for quantifying and comparing morphological variation and covariation structure within and among groups. Finally, we discuss the future directions for morphometrics in developmental biology that will be required for approaches that enable quantitative integration across the genotype-phenotype map.
© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Craniofacial; Imaging; MicroCT; Morphogenesis; Morphometrics; Mouse; Optical Projection Tomography; Phenomics

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26589938      PMCID: PMC5299999          DOI: 10.1016/bs.ctdb.2015.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Top Dev Biol        ISSN: 0070-2153            Impact factor:   4.897


  70 in total

1.  Statistical power comparisons among alternative morphometric methods.

Authors:  F J Rohlf
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.868

2.  "Voxel-based morphometry" should not be used with imperfectly registered images.

Authors:  F L Bookstein
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Use of two-block partial least-squares to study covariation in shape.

Authors:  F J Rohlf; M Corti
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 15.683

4.  Multivariate regression models and geometric morphometrics: the search for causal factors in the analysis of shape.

Authors:  L R Monteiro
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 15.683

5.  Developmental integration in a complex morphological structure: how distinct are the modules in the mouse mandible?

Authors:  Christian Peter Klingenberg; Katharina Mebus; Jean-Christophe Auffray
Journal:  Evol Dev       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.930

6.  Cranial allometry, phylogeography, and systematics of large-bodied papionins (primates: Cercopithecinae) inferred from geometric morphometric analysis of landmark data.

Authors:  Stephen R Frost; Leslie F Marcus; Fred L Bookstein; David P Reddy; Eric Delson
Journal:  Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol       Date:  2003-12

7.  Visualizing human embryos.

Authors:  B R Smith
Journal:  Sci Am       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.142

8.  Cranial integration in Homo: singular warps analysis of the midsagittal plane in ontogeny and evolution.

Authors:  Fred L Bookstein; Philipp Gunz; Philipp Mitteroecker; Hermann Prossinger; Katrin Schaefer; Horst Seidler
Journal:  J Hum Evol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.895

9.  Developmental regulation of skull morphology. I. Ontogenetic dynamics of variance.

Authors:  Miriam Leah Zelditch; Barbara L Lundrigan; Theodore Garland
Journal:  Evol Dev       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.930

10.  Optical projection tomography as a tool for 3D microscopy and gene expression studies.

Authors:  James Sharpe; Ulf Ahlgren; Paul Perry; Bill Hill; Allyson Ross; Jacob Hecksher-Sørensen; Richard Baldock; Duncan Davidson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2002-04-19       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  21 in total

1.  Nonlinear gene expression-phenotype relationships contribute to variation and clefting in the A/WySn mouse.

Authors:  Rebecca M Green; Courtney L Leach; Virginia M Diewert; Jose David Aponte; Eric J Schmidt; James M Cheverud; Charles C Roseman; Nathan M Young; Ralph S Marcucio; Benedikt Hallgrimsson
Journal:  Dev Dyn       Date:  2019-09-14       Impact factor: 3.780

2.  Rapid automated landmarking for morphometric analysis of three-dimensional facial scans.

Authors:  Mao Li; Joanne B Cole; Mange Manyama; Jacinda R Larson; Denise K Liberton; Sheri L Riccardi; Tracey M Ferrara; Stephanie A Santorico; Jordan J Bannister; Nils D Forkert; Richard A Spritz; Washington Mio; Benedikt Hallgrimsson
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 2.610

3.  Angiotensin receptor blockade mediated amelioration of mucopolysaccharidosis type I cardiac and craniofacial pathology.

Authors:  Mark J Osborn; Beau R Webber; Ronald T McElmurry; Kyle D Rudser; Anthony P DeFeo; Michael Muradian; Anna Petryk; Benedikt Hallgrimsson; Bruce R Blazar; Jakub Tolar; Elizabeth A Braunlin
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 4.982

4.  Brief Report: Facial Asymmetry and Autistic-Like Traits in the General Population.

Authors:  Maryam Boutrus; Zulqarnain Gilani; Murray T Maybery; Gail A Alvares; Diana W Tan; Peter R Eastwood; Ajmal Mian; Andrew J O Whitehouse
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2021-06

5.  Osteophyte volume calculation using dissimilarity-excluding Procrustes registration of archived bone models from healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Amy M Morton; Bardiya Akhbari; Douglas C Moore; Joseph J Crisco
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2019-12-25       Impact factor: 3.494

6.  Analysis of facial skeletal asymmetry during foetal development using μCT imaging.

Authors:  Motoki Katsube; Sara M Rolfe; Stephanie R Bortolussi; Yutaka Yamaguchi; Joy M Richman; Shigehito Yamada; Siddharth R Vora
Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.826

7.  The effect of automated landmark identification on morphometric analyses.

Authors:  Christopher J Percival; Jay Devine; Benjamin C Darwin; Wei Liu; Matthijs van Eede; R Mark Henkelman; Benedikt Hallgrimsson
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2019-03-22       Impact factor: 2.610

8.  Congenital muscle dystrophy and diet consistency affect mouse skull shape differently.

Authors:  Alexander Spassov; Viviana Toro-Ibacache; Mirjam Krautwald; Heinrich Brinkmeier; Kornelius Kupczik
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 2.610

9.  Landmark-free, parametric hypothesis tests regarding two-dimensional contour shapes using coherent point drift registration and statistical parametric mapping.

Authors:  Todd C Pataky; Masahide Yagi; Noriaki Ichihashi; Philip G Cox
Journal:  PeerJ Comput Sci       Date:  2021-05-18

10.  The Interaction of Genetic Background and Mutational Effects in Regulation of Mouse Craniofacial Shape.

Authors:  Christopher J Percival; Pauline Marangoni; Vagan Tapaltsyan; Ophir Klein; Benedikt Hallgrímsson
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2017-05-05       Impact factor: 3.154

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.