Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39323056›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2025

Differential performance of aqueous- and ethylic-Lugol's iodine stain to visualize anatomy in μCT-scanned vertebrates.

Hayley L Crowell, Ramon S Nagesan, Alison R Davis Rabosky, Matthew A Kolmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Hayley L CrowellMuseum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3531-6673
Ramon S NagesanMuseum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6195-1203
Alison R Davis RaboskyMuseum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4664-8246
Matthew A KolmannMuseum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Funding

University of Michigan
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Museum specimens are an increasingly important tool for studying global biodiversity. With the advent of diffusible iodine-based contrast-enhanced computed tomography (diceCT), researchers can now visualize an organism's internal soft tissue anatomy without the need for physical dissection or other highly destructive sampling methods. However, there are many considerations when deciding which method of staining to use for diceCT to produce the best gray-scale contrast for facilitating downstream anatomical analyses. The general lack of direct comparisons among staining methodologies can make it difficult for researchers to determine which approaches are most appropriate for their study. Here, we compare the performance of ethylic-Lugol's iodine solution with aqueous-Lugol's staining solution across several vertebrate orders to assess differential imaging outcomes. We found that ethylic-Lugol's is better for visualizing muscle attachment to bone but provides overall lower contrast between soft tissue types. Comparatively, aqueous-based Lugol's provides high-contrast imaging among soft tissue types, although bone is more difficult to discern. We conclude that the choice of staining methodology largely depends on the type of anatomical data the researcher wishes to collect, and we provide a decision-based framework for assessing which staining methodology (ethylic or aqueous) is most appropriate for desired imaging results.

Indexed as

Staining and LabelingVertebratesX-Ray MicrotomographyAnimalsContrast MediaIodidesIodineContrast MediaIodidesIodineLugol's solutioncomputed‐tomographycontrast staindiceCTmorphologymuseum collectionsspecimen

Identifiers

PMID39323056
PMCPMC11996703

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.