A Novel 3-D Image-Based Morphological Method for Phenotypic Analysis

A new approach for the study of geometric morphometrics is presented based on well-established image processing techniques in a novel combination to support high-throughput analysis necessary for large-scale determination of genotype-phenotype relationships. The method retains full 3-D data, and avoids manual landmark selection. Micro-computed tomography images are superimposed into a common orientation by rigid image registration with an isotropic scale factor. An average sample shape is determined by averaging the intensities of corresponding voxels of the registered images, and shape variation is determined by calculating the image gradient of the average shape. Localized shape differences between mean images or between an individual and a group mean are identified and quantified by surface-to-surface distance measures of superimposed images. Validation was performed using geometric shapes of known dimensions as well as biological samples of C57 BL/6 J and A/WySnJ mouse skulls, and shape variation of the mouse skulls was consistent with previously published results. Although the image gradient is sensitive to both image registration and filtration of the average image, the effect can be minimized by consistent use of image analysis parameters. While the proposed approach deviates from well-established landmark-based geometric morphometric tools, it is not intended to replace these current methods. Rather, it will be an important contribution to provide high-throughput screening in large-scale studies focused on understanding genotype-phenotype relationships so that subsequent morphometric approaches using established techniques can be better focused.

[1]  L. F. Marcus,et al.  Advances in Morphometrics , 1996, NATO ASI Series.

[2]  S. Lele,et al.  Some comments on coordinate-free and scale-invariant methods in morphometrics. , 1991, American journal of physical anthropology.

[3]  H. David Sheets,et al.  Geometric morphometrics for biologists : a primer , 2004 .

[4]  Peter Lorenzen,et al.  Multi-modal image set registration and atlas formation , 2006, Medical Image Anal..

[5]  Miriam Leah Zelditch,et al.  Craniofacial variability and morphological integration in mice susceptible to cleft lip and palate , 2004, Journal of anatomy.

[6]  Fred L. Bookstein,et al.  “Voxel-Based Morphometry” Should Not Be Used with Imperfectly Registered Images , 2001, NeuroImage.

[7]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  A survey of medical image registration , 1998, Medical Image Anal..

[8]  Erika Kristensen,et al.  Phenotypic variability and craniofacial dysmorphology: increased shape variance in a mouse model for cleft lip , 2008, Journal of anatomy.

[9]  Y. J. Zhang Quantitative study of 3D gradient operators , 1993, Image Vis. Comput..

[10]  S. Lele,et al.  The promise of geometric morphometrics. , 2002, American journal of physical anthropology.

[11]  Jeffrey C. Murray,et al.  Mutations in IRF6 cause Van der Woude and popliteal pterygium syndromes , 2002, Nature Genetics.

[12]  Fred L. Bookstein,et al.  Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data. , 1998 .

[13]  D L Hill,et al.  Automated three-dimensional registration of magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography brain images by multiresolution optimization of voxel similarity measures. , 1997, Medical physics.

[14]  R A Smith,et al.  Is There an Optimal Electrode Pad Size to Maximize Intracardiac Current in Transthoracic Defibrillation? , 1997, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[15]  Lydia Ng,et al.  Medical lmage Registration: Concepts and Implementation , 2004 .

[16]  R Plonsey,et al.  Mechanism of cardiac defibrillation in open-chest dogs with unipolar DC-coupled simultaneous activation and shock potential recordings. , 1990, Circulation.

[17]  P K Commean,et al.  Residual-limb shape change: three-dimensional CT scan measurement and depiction in vivo. , 1996, Radiology.

[18]  P D Wolf,et al.  The potential gradient field created by epicardial defibrillation electrodes in dogs. , 1986, Circulation.

[19]  William E. Lorensen,et al.  Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm , 1987, SIGGRAPH.

[20]  Ralph Müller,et al.  Evaluation of Three-dimensional Image Registration Methodologies for In Vivo Micro-computed Tomography , 2006, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  A. Verloes,et al.  Phenotypic variability in van der Woude syndrome. , 1995, Genetic counseling.

[22]  Gary E. Christensen,et al.  Synthesizing average 3D anatomical shapes , 2006, NeuroImage.

[23]  Paul Suetens,et al.  Comparative evaluation of multiresolution optimization strategies for multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information , 1999, Medical Image Anal..

[24]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry—The Methods , 2000, NeuroImage.

[25]  P. Rüegsegger,et al.  A new method for the model‐independent assessment of thickness in three‐dimensional images , 1997 .

[26]  I. Efimov,et al.  Mechanisms of superiority of ascending ramp waveforms: new insights into mechanisms of shock-induced vulnerability and defibrillation. , 2005, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[27]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-based morphometry , 2007 .

[28]  Subhash R. Lele,et al.  Invariance, Identifiability, and Morphometrics , 2002 .

[29]  Florence H Sheehan,et al.  Monitoring change in the three-dimensional shape of the human left ventricle. , 2004, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography.

[30]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Why Voxel-Based Morphometry Should Be Used , 2001, NeuroImage.

[31]  Raymond E Ideker,et al.  Do clinically relevant transthoracic defibrillation energies cause myocardial damage and dysfunction? , 2003, Resuscitation.

[32]  Terry S. Yoo,et al.  Insight into Images: Principles and Practice for Segmentation, Registration, and Image Analysis , 2004 .

[33]  D. Deno,et al.  A Percutaneous Catheter‐Based System for the Measurement of Potential Gradients Applicable to the Study of Transthoracic Defibrillation , 2007, Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE.

[34]  Andrew E Pollard,et al.  Measuring surface potential components necessary for transmembrane current computation using microfabricated arrays. , 2005, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[35]  F. Rohlf,et al.  Extensions of the Procrustes Method for the Optimal Superimposition of Landmarks , 1990 .

[36]  T Greitz,et al.  Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism Accuracy and Precision of the Computerized Brain Atlas Programme for Localization and Quantification in Positron Emission Tomography , 2022 .

[37]  J. Gower Generalized procrustes analysis , 1975 .

[38]  R. Menzel,et al.  Three‐dimensional average‐shape atlas of the honeybee brain and its applications , 2005, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[39]  Jerry L. Prince,et al.  Image registration based on boundary mapping , 1996, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[40]  S N Khan,et al.  Intrafamilial variability of popliteal pterygium syndrome: a family description. , 1986, The Cleft palate journal.

[41]  Jean Meunier,et al.  Average Brain Models: A Convergence Study , 2000, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[42]  J. Rosborough,et al.  Intracardiac voltage gradients during transthoracic defibrillation: implications for postshock myocardial injury. , 2005, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.