Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 22, 2026

Dissection, MicroCT Scanning and Morphometric Analyses of the Baculum
04:32

Dissection, MicroCT Scanning and Morphometric Analyses of the Baculum

Published on: March 19, 2017

A comparison of histomorphometric data collection methods.

Marissa C Stewart1, Lara E McCormick, Jesse R Goliath

  • 1Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, 4034 Smith Laboratory, 174 West 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. stewart.921@osu.edu

Journal of Forensic Sciences
|May 25, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Chaos theory and its applications in forensic anthropology.

Forensic science international. Synergy·2025
Same author

Overcoming Systemic Barriers in US Forensic Anthropology Education: Considering Underlying Barriers to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging in Forensic Anthropology.

American journal of biological anthropology·2025
Same author

Causative effects of cranial depression fractures: A case study of structural violence and social vulnerability within the Mississippi state asylum.

Forensic science international. Synergy·2023
Same author

Diversity in forensic sciences: Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) representation in different medicolegal fields in the United States.

Forensic science international. Synergy·2022
Same author

Ontogenetic Patterning of Human Subchondral Bone Microarchitecture in the Proximal Tibia.

Biology·2022
Same author

Body size and social status in medieval Alba (Cuneo), Italy.

American journal of physical anthropology·2019
Same journal

GenoEye: A machine learning-based framework for the prediction of intermediate eye color phenotypes.

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
Same journal

Sharp force trauma analysis without animal bones: A proposal for sustainable and ethical bone proxies.

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
Same journal

Absolute dating of modern paper using <sup>14</sup>C bomb peak data of the paper fibers.

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
Same journal

Forensic timeline investigation of Apple Health app on iOS.

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
Same journal

Help v. harm: How a "lookup table" for evaluating DNA evidence given activity-level propositions could lead to wrongful convictions.

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
Same journal

Correction to "Development and Evaluation of an Iodoplatinate-Based Strip-Type Kit for On-Site Drug Screening in Beverages".

Journal of forensic sciences·2026
See all related articles

This study compared four histomorphometry methods for bone analysis, finding no significant differences in data collection. Method choice depends on factors like cost, time, and user experience for skeletal biology research.

Area of Science:

  • Skeletal Biology
  • Histomorphometry
  • Bone Histology

Background:

  • Standardization of skeletal biology variables is ongoing.
  • Histomorphometric data collection techniques from bone thin sections lack standardization.
  • Relative cortical area is a key metric in bone research.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the accuracy and reliability of different histomorphometric data collection methods.
  • To evaluate usability factors (cost, time, user-experience) of various techniques.
  • To assess inter-method, inter-observer, and intra-observer variability in data acquisition.

Main Methods:

  • Comparison of four histomorphometry methods: Merz eyepiece reticule (visual), flatbed scanner, image overlay, and digital SLR camera.
  • Data collection focused on relative cortical area values from bone thin sections.

More Related Videos

Standardized Histomorphometric Evaluation of Osteoarthritis in a Surgical Mouse Model
07:32

Standardized Histomorphometric Evaluation of Osteoarthritis in a Surgical Mouse Model

Published on: May 6, 2020

Measuring Bone Remodeling and Recreating the Tumor-Bone Microenvironment Using Calvaria Co-culture and Histomorphometry
08:24

Measuring Bone Remodeling and Recreating the Tumor-Bone Microenvironment Using Calvaria Co-culture and Histomorphometry

Published on: March 14, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 22, 2026

Dissection, MicroCT Scanning and Morphometric Analyses of the Baculum
04:32

Dissection, MicroCT Scanning and Morphometric Analyses of the Baculum

Published on: March 19, 2017

Standardized Histomorphometric Evaluation of Osteoarthritis in a Surgical Mouse Model
07:32

Standardized Histomorphometric Evaluation of Osteoarthritis in a Surgical Mouse Model

Published on: May 6, 2020

Measuring Bone Remodeling and Recreating the Tumor-Bone Microenvironment Using Calvaria Co-culture and Histomorphometry
08:24

Measuring Bone Remodeling and Recreating the Tumor-Bone Microenvironment Using Calvaria Co-culture and Histomorphometry

Published on: March 14, 2020

  • Statistical analysis using ANOVA to determine variability between and within methods and observers.

    • Main Results:

    • No statistically significant differences were found between the four examined histomorphometry methods.
    • Intra-observer error was higher for the microscopic eyepiece method, influenced by user experience.
    • Usability factors like cost, time, and ease-of-use varied considerably among the methods.

    Conclusions:

    • All four methods are viable for collecting relative cortical area data in histomorphometric research.
    • Method selection should consider practical aspects such as cost, time, and user expertise.
    • Researchers must be aware of potential biases and variability, particularly with the microscopic eyepiece method.