Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T12:00:39.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of manual and automatic segmentation of muscle regions in spiral computed tomography images of sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

E. Navajas*
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Animal Biology Division, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
C.A. Glasbey
Affiliation:
Biomathematics & Statistics Scotland, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, Scotland
K.A. McLean
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Animal Biology Division, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
N.R Lambe
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Animal Biology Division, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
L. Bünger
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Animal Biology Division, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
G. Simm
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Animal Biology Division, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
Get access

Extract

Computed tomography (CT) gives accurate in vivo estimates of sheep carcass composition based on information provided by cross-sectional CT reference scans (Young et al., 2001). Spiral CT is a novel imaging technology in which contiguous cross-sectional scans of a known thickness are collected. This data allows the reconstruction of images in three dimensions, giving the possibility of a comprehensive assessment of characteristics that are defined in terms of shape, such as conformation and muscularity. The development of automatic procedures for image analysis is of high priority due to the large amount of information contained in the spiral scans. The first step in image analysis is isolating the carcass components of each cross-sectional image, called segmentation. An algorithm to automatically segment the cross-sectional images in the spiral scan was developed, with the objective of investigating in vivo assessments of conformation and muscularity in sheep. The aim of this study was to compare the muscle areas obtained by manual and automatic segmentations.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Glasbey, C.A.;Young, M.J. 2002. Maximum a posteriori estimation of image boundaries by dynamic programming. Applied Statistics 51: 209221.Google Scholar
Lane, ane.W.; Payne, R.W. 1996. GENSTAT for Windows: An Introductory Course (2nd Ed). Lawes Agricultural Trust.Google Scholar
Mann, A.D., Young, M.J., Glasbey, C.A. and McLean, K.A. 2003. STAR: Sheep Tomogram Analysis Routines (V.3.4). BioSS software documentation.Google Scholar
Young, M.J., Simm, G. and Glasbey, C.A. 2001. Computerised tomography for carcass analysis. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science 2001: 250254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar