Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: Large-scale deep tissue voltage imaging with targeted illumination confocal microscopy

doi: 10.1101/2023.07.21.548930

Figure Lengend Snippet: (a-c) Example Voltron2 fluorescence images under targeted illumination with confocal slit width set to 4.5, 22.5, and 156 µm. Scale bar 50 µm. (d) Voltron2 fluorescence image over the same FOV but acquired without targeted illumination and with a confocal slit width of 156 µm. TI, targeted illumination. Scale bar 50 µm. (e,h,i) Comparison of spike Δ F / F , spike detection fidelity d ′ , and spike SNR measured with targeted illumination and confocal slit widths of 4.5, 11.3, 22.5, and 156 µm (n = 30 cells from 6 FOVs, 2 mice). Box plots: box, 25th (Q1, bottom line) to 75 th (Q3, top line) percentiles; whiskers, Q 1 − 1.5 × I Q R to Q 3 + 1.5 × I Q R , where I Q R = Q 3 − Q 1 ; middle line, median (m); notch, from m − 1.57 × I Q R / n to m + 1.57 × I Q R / n ; dots, measurement points. p < 0.05, p < 0.01, p < 0.001, no label if p ≥ 0.05, pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank test, see for statistics. (f,g,j) Comparison of spike Δ F / F , photobleaching rate, and spike SNR measured with and without targeted illumination when using a 14 µm confocal slit. For (f,j), n = 19 cells from 5 FOVs, 2 mice. For (g), n = 92 cells from 5 FOVs, 2 mice. (l,m,n) Example images (scale bar, 20 µm) and corresponding fluorescence traces from two neighboring neurons with targeted illumination and confocal slit widths of 4.5, 22.5, and 156 µm (from top to bottom). Gray line, fluorescence traces; red line, extracted subthreshold Vm traces; r, Pearson cross-correlation coefficient between the subthreshold Vm traces from the 2 neurons.

Article Snippet: To analyze Vm-Vm correlations, we calculated Pearson cross-correlation coefficients (Matlab function corrcoef ) for the extracted subthreshold traces F s u b t from pairs of neurons.

Techniques: Fluorescence, Comparison, IF-P

Journal: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Article Title: A fair and EMG-validated comparison of recruitment criteria, musculotendon models and muscle coordination strategies, for the inverse-dynamics based optimization of muscle forces during gait

doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00806-6

Figure Lengend Snippet: Mean across subjects Pearson correlation coefficient r values between EMG vs. muscle activations (r < 0.40 underlined and r > 0.60 in italics) and computational time of the different approaches

Article Snippet: Matching between estimated muscle activations and EMG was quantified via cross-correlation using the Pearson correlation coefficient r (Matlab’s function corrcoef ) with a maximum time delay of 150 ms [ ].

Techniques:

Journal: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Article Title: A fair and EMG-validated comparison of recruitment criteria, musculotendon models and muscle coordination strategies, for the inverse-dynamics based optimization of muscle forces during gait

doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00806-6

Figure Lengend Snippet: p-value for paired sample t-test for the Pearson correlation coefficient r between across-subjects mean (p < 0.05 underlined, NA: not applicable)

Article Snippet: Matching between estimated muscle activations and EMG was quantified via cross-correlation using the Pearson correlation coefficient r (Matlab’s function corrcoef ) with a maximum time delay of 150 ms [ ].

Techniques:

Journal: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Article Title: A fair and EMG-validated comparison of recruitment criteria, musculotendon models and muscle coordination strategies, for the inverse-dynamics based optimization of muscle forces during gait

doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00806-6

Figure Lengend Snippet: Mean across muscles Pearson correlation coefficient r values between EMG vs. muscle activations (r > 0.60 in italics)

Article Snippet: Matching between estimated muscle activations and EMG was quantified via cross-correlation using the Pearson correlation coefficient r (Matlab’s function corrcoef ) with a maximum time delay of 150 ms [ ].

Techniques: Muscles

Journal: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Article Title: A fair and EMG-validated comparison of recruitment criteria, musculotendon models and muscle coordination strategies, for the inverse-dynamics based optimization of muscle forces during gait

doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00806-6

Figure Lengend Snippet: p-value for paired sample t-test for the Pearson correlation coefficient r between across-muscles mean (p < 0.05 underlined, NA: not applicable)

Article Snippet: Matching between estimated muscle activations and EMG was quantified via cross-correlation using the Pearson correlation coefficient r (Matlab’s function corrcoef ) with a maximum time delay of 150 ms [ ].

Techniques: