Cited by 541Comparative Animal Anatomy StudiesAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesAnatomy and Medical Technology

Diffusible iodine‐based contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (diceCT): an emerging tool for rapid, high‐resolution, 3‐D imaging of metazoan soft tissues

Open access
Gignac, Paul M., Kley, Nathan J., Clarke, Julia A., Colbert, Matthew W., Morhardt, Ashley C., Cerio, Donald, Cost, Ian N., Cox, Philip G. +15 more·2016·Journal of Anatomy

Abstract

Morphologists have historically had to rely on destructive procedures to visualize the three‐dimensional (3‐D) anatomy of animals. More recently, however, non‐destructive techniques have come to the forefront. These include X‐ray computed tomography ( CT ), which has been used most commonly to examine the mineralized, hard‐tissue anatomy of living and fossil metazoans. One relatively new and potentially transformative aspect of current CT ‐based research is the use of chemical agents to render visible, and differentiate between, soft‐tissue structures in X‐ray images. Specifically, iodine has emerged as one of the most widely used of these contrast agents among animal morphologists due to its ease of handling, cost effectiveness, and differential affinities for major types of soft tissues. The rapid adoption of iodine‐based contrast agents has resulted in a proliferation of distinct specimen preparations and scanning parameter choices, as well as an increasing variety of imaging hardware and software preferences. Here we provide a critical review of the recent contributions to iodine‐based, contrast‐enhanced CT research to enable researchers just beginning to employ contrast enhancement to make sense of this complex new landscape of methodologies. We provide a detailed summary of recent case studies, assess factors that govern success at each step of the specimen storage, preparation, and imaging processes, and make recommendations for standardizing both techniques and reporting practices. Finally, we discuss potential cutting‐edge applications of diffusible iodine‐based contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (dice CT ) and the issues that must still be overcome to facilitate the broader adoption of dice CT going forward.

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 · 10.1111/joa.12449

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To image insects with conventional micro-CT, staining and/or drying is often required to discriminate between tissues.

    “to image insects with conventional micro-CT, staining and/or drying is often required to discriminate between tissues 16 – 19”

    From High-throughput phenomics of global ant biodiversity (2026) · cites this paper as [18]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Vickerton P, Jarvis J, Jeffery NS (2013) Concentration‐dependent specimen shrinkage in iodine‐enhanced microCT. J Anat 223, 185– 193. 23721431 PMC3724211

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gignac, P. M., Kley, N. J., Clarke, J. A., Colbert, M. W., Morhardt, A. C., Cerio, D., Cost, I. N., Cox, P. G., Daza, J. D., Early, C. M., Echols, M. S., Henkelman, R. M., Herdina, A. N., Holliday, C. M., Li, Z., Mahlow, K., Merchant, S., Müller, J., Orsbon, C. P., Paluh, D. J., Thies, M. L., Tsai, H. P., & Witmer, L. M.
Affiliations
  • Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences (US)
  • Stony Brook University (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Ohio University (US)
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • University of York (GB)
  • Sam Houston State University (US)
  • OAK Orthopedics (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Museum für Naturkunde (DE)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Villanova University (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Gignac, Paul M.
Venue
Journal of Anatomy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-03-11
Volume
228
Issue
6
Pages
889-909
ISSN
  • 0021-8782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7580
OpenAlex
W2296094736
Cited by
541
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 62 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 11 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Anatomy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • BearWorks (Missouri State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (NSF IOS‐0749750, NSF EAGER 1450842, NSF DEB‐1457180, NSF EAGER 1450850)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Anatomy and Medical Technology
Keywords
diceCT, iodinated contrast media, contrast-enhanced CT, soft tissue imaging, specimen preparation, specimen storage, 3D imaging, non-destructive imaging
MeSH terms
Anatomy, Comparative, Animals, Contrast Media, Iodides, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Imaging, Three-Dimensional

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