Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,636

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The ImageJ ecosystem: An open platform for biomedical image analysis

Open access
Schindelin, Johannes, Rueden, Curtis T., Hiner, Mark C., Eliceiri, Kevin W.·2015·Molecular Reproduction and Development

Abstract

SUMMARY: Technology in microscopy advances rapidly, enabling increasingly affordable, faster, and more precise quantitative biomedical imaging, which necessitates correspondingly more‐advanced image processing and analysis techniques. A wide range of software is available—from commercial to academic, special‐purpose to Swiss army knife, small to large—but a key characteristic of software that is suitable for scientific inquiry is its accessibility. Open‐source software is ideal for scientific endeavors because it can be freely inspected, modified, and redistributed; in particular, the open‐software platform ImageJ has had a huge impact on the life sciences, and continues to do so. From its inception, ImageJ has grown significantly due largely to being freely available and its vibrant and helpful user community. Scientists as diverse as interested hobbyists, technical assistants, students, scientific staff, and advanced biology researchers use ImageJ on a daily basis, and exchange knowledge via its dedicated mailing list. Uses of ImageJ range from data visualization and teaching to advanced image processing and statistical analysis. The software's extensibility continues to attract biologists at all career stages as well as computer scientists who wish to effectively implement specific image‐processing algorithms. In this review, we use the ImageJ project as a case study of how open‐source software fosters its suites of software tools, making multitudes of image‐analysis technology easily accessible to the scientific community. We specifically explore what makes ImageJ so popular, how it impacts the life sciences, how it inspires other projects, and how it is self‐influenced by coevolving projects within the ImageJ ecosystem. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 82: 518–529, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mrd.22489

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 2,636

Metadata

Authors
Schindelin, J., Rueden, C. T., Hiner, M. C., & Eliceiri, K. W.
Venue
Molecular Reproduction and Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-07
Volume
82
Issue
7-8
Pages
518-529
ISSN
  • 1040-452X (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2795
OpenAlex
W1524992328
Cited by
2,636
References
2
FWCI
139.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: The ImageJ ecosystem: An open platform for biomedical image analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mrd.22489
The paper
Schindelin, J., Rueden, C. T., Hiner, M. C., & Eliceiri, K. W. (2015). The ImageJ ecosystem: An open platform for biomedical image analysis. Molecular Reproduction and Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.22489

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.