The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
X‐ray reconstruction of moving morphology (XROMM): precision, accuracy and applications in comparative biomechanics research
Abstract
X‐Ray Reconstruction of Moving Morphology (XROMM) comprises a set of 3D X‐ray motion analysis techniques that merge motion data from in vivo X‐ray videos with skeletal morphology data from bone scans into precise and accurate animations of 3D bones moving in 3D space. XROMM methods include: (1) manual alignment (registration) of bone models to video sequences, i.e., Scientific Rotoscoping; (2) computer vision‐based autoregistration of bone models to biplanar X‐ray videos; and (3) marker‐based registration of bone models to biplanar X‐ray videos. Here, we describe a novel set of X‐ray hardware, software, and workflows for marker‐based XROMM. Refurbished C‐arm fluoroscopes retrofitted with high‐speed video cameras offer a relatively inexpensive X‐ray hardware solution for comparative biomechanics research. Precision for our biplanar C‐arm hardware and analysis software, measured as the standard deviation of pairwise distances between 1 mm tantalum markers embedded in rigid objects, was found to be ±0.046 mm under optimal conditions and ±0.084 mm under actual in vivo recording conditions. Mean error in measurement of a known distance between two beads was within the 0.01 mm fabrication tolerance of the test object, and mean absolute error was 0.037 mm. Animating 3D bone models from sets of marker positions (XROMM animation) makes it possible to study skeletal kinematics in the context of detailed bone morphology. The biplanar fluoroscopy hardware and computational methods described here should make XROMM an accessible and useful addition to the available technologies for studying the form, function, and evolution of vertebrate animals. J. Exp. Zool. 313A:262–279, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hedrick, T. L. (2008) · Bioinspiration & Biomimetics · doi:10.1088/1748-3182/3/3/034001 · Cited by 1,360
Self-citation
Cited by
The history and impact of digitization and digital data mobilization on biodiversity research
Nelson, G., & Ellis, S. (2019) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0391 · Cited by 304
Heers, A. M., Baier, D. B., Jackson, B. E., & Dial, K. P. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153446 · Cited by 60
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Brainerd, E. L., Baier, D. B., Gatesy, S. M., Hedrick, T. L., Metzger, K. A., Gilbert, S. L., & Crisco, J. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological Genetics and Physiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-01-21
- Volume
- 313A
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 262-279
- ISSN
- 1932-5223 (ISSN-L)
- 1932-5231
- OpenAlex
- W2112924835
- Cited by
- 524
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: X‐ray reconstruction of moving morphology (XROMM): precision, accuracy and applications in comparative biomechanics research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jez.589
- The paper
- Brainerd, E. L., Baier, D. B., Gatesy, S. M., Hedrick, T. L., Metzger, K. A., Gilbert, S. L., & Crisco, J. J. (2010). X‐ray reconstruction of moving morphology (XROMM): precision, accuracy and applications in comparative biomechanics research. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Ecological Genetics and Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.589
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.