Acquisition, Reconstruction, and Presentation
for 3-D Computed Tomography (CT)
Kremer J.R., D.N. Mastronarde and J.R. McIntosh, Computer visualization of
three-dimensional image data using IMOD, J. Struct. Biol. 116 (1996)
reconstructions with High Efficiency CT (HECT)™,
The projection data
for the below cellular images were provided by the National Institute
of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB/NIH).
The original transmission electron microscopy (TEM) data (not shown) is
that used in
Trachtenberg, S., Dorward, L.M., Speransky, V.V., Jaffe, H.,
S.B., Leapman, R.D.,
of the Cytoskeleton of Spiroplasma
melliferum BC3 and Its Interactions with the Cell Membrane,
J. Mol. Biol., 378, pp. 776-787, 2008. FBP reconstruction was provided
by V. Speransky. HECT was performed by Cyber Technology, Inc.
renditions (C) Wolfram R. Jarisch, 2008
HECT versus FBP CT
for Transmission Electron Microscopy
of Filtered Back-Projection (FBP; Left) with HECT (Right).
Reconstructions were from 166 views, double-tilt. Angular increment was
1.5 degrees. Rendition in IMOD2.
the Filtered Back-Projection was computed from 2048 x 2048 pixel
projections while HECT used only 1024 x 1024 pixel projections.
Correspondingly, the display slice-thickness in the FBP was
chosen as 2 voxels. The two methods use different correction methods to
account for sample distortion. HECT used a polynomial regression on unseparated cellular and gold bead data.
lack of contrast dynamics in the FBP (intra-cellular vs. extra-cellular
density) when compared to the HECT reconstruction.
cut through the above sample. Observe that the "upper" and "lower"
image margins show zero density. This was not imposed by external
constraints but is the result of accurate estimation via the HECT
an extra-margin of (+/-) 10% had been added to the estimated slice
thickness prior to reconstruction to test the hypothesis that the image
density at the margins will taper to zero. The image constrast has been
reversed (low density is black) compared to the above rendition in
order to better demonstrate zero density.
1 US Patent 8,660,228