pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02080 · v1 · pith:ZPQRJIXDnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · 💻 cs.MA · cs.AI· cs.CV

Agentic-J: An AI Agent for Biological Microscopy Image Analysis

Lukas Johanns , Marilin Moor , Davide Panzeri , Yu Zhou , Xinyi Chen , Nora F. K. Pauly , Zixuan Pan , Matthias Gunzer
show 4 more authors
Andreas M\"uller Yiyu Shi Hedi Peterson Jianxu Chen
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.MA cs.AIcs.CV
keywords AI agentsbiological image analysisImageJmulti-agent systemsmicroscopynatural languagereproducible workflowsautomation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A multi-agent AI assistant lets biologists describe microscopy analysis tasks in natural language and receive executable, traceable ImageJ scripts.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents Agentic-J as a containerised system that uses multiple specialised AI agents to handle the technical complexities of ImageJ-based image analysis. Biologists can specify tasks such as nuclei segmentation, cell tracking or multi-condition quantification using everyday language instead of writing code. This setup generates organised projects with documented scripts, making every step traceable and the entire workflow reproducible. The approach addresses the challenge that few researchers master all the required tools and domain knowledge at once.

Core claim

Agentic-J is a containerised multi-agent AI assistant primarily for ImageJ/Fiji that enables biologists to specify analysis tasks in natural language. The system generates executable scripts organised into a documented project structure so every analysis decision is traceable and the workflow can be reproduced or shared. Specialised sub-agents handle plugin management, code generation, debugging, quality assurance, and statistical reporting.

What carries the argument

The multi-agent architecture with sub-agents dedicated to plugin management, code generation, debugging, quality assurance, and statistical reporting.

If this is right

  • Biologists without programming skills can perform advanced analyses like multi-condition quantification.
  • Analysis workflows become fully reproducible and shareable through documented project structures.
  • Every decision in the analysis process is traceable back to the generated code and documentation.
  • Integration of heterogeneous tools and domain knowledge is automated by the agent system.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This design could be adapted to other biological analysis platforms beyond ImageJ.
  • Automated quality assurance might help standardise statistical practices across labs.
  • Natural language interfaces could lower the barrier for collaborative analysis in research teams.

Load-bearing premise

Natural language prompts and the multi-agent architecture can reliably produce correct, executable ImageJ scripts for diverse biological microscopy tasks without frequent human correction or hidden failures.

What would settle it

Running the system on a range of standard biological microscopy datasets and finding that the generated scripts frequently fail to execute or produce incorrect results requiring manual fixes.

read the original abstract

Biological image analysis increasingly demands integration across heterogeneous tools, programming environments, and domain knowledge that few researchers can command simultaneously. We present Agentic-J, a containerised, multi-agent AI assistant, primarily for ImageJ/Fiji that enables biologists to specify analysis tasks in natural language, from nuclei segmentation and cell tracking to multi-condition quantification. The agent generates executable scripts organised into a documented project structure, so every analysis decision is traceable and the workflow can be reproduced or shared. The specialised sub-agents handle plugin management, code generation, debugging, quality assurance, and statistical reporting. In this paper we introduce the system's design, demonstrate real biological microscopy image analysis workflows, and detailed the technical implementation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Agentic-J, a containerised multi-agent AI system for ImageJ/Fiji that lets biologists describe microscopy image analysis tasks (nuclei segmentation, cell tracking, multi-condition quantification) in natural language. Specialised sub-agents manage plugins, generate and debug code, perform QA, and produce statistical reports, outputting documented, traceable, and reproducible project structures.

Significance. If the multi-agent pipeline reliably converts natural-language prompts into correct, executable ImageJ scripts across diverse tasks without frequent human intervention, the system would lower the barrier for non-programmers to conduct reproducible biological image analysis and could accelerate adoption of advanced quantification methods. The containerised design and emphasis on traceability are practical strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript states that the system 'enables biologists to specify analysis tasks in natural language' and 'demonstrate[s] real biological microscopy image analysis workflows,' yet supplies no success rates, intervention counts, task-coverage statistics, error rates, or comparison against manual scripting baselines. This leaves the central claim that the sub-agent architecture reliably produces correct scripts untested.
  2. [Demonstrations] Demonstrations section (implied by the abstract's claim of real workflows): the absence of any quantitative validation (e.g., fraction of prompts that required human correction, plugin-compatibility failure modes, or agreement with ground-truth segmentations) makes it impossible to assess whether the weakest assumption—that NL prompts plus the multi-agent loop succeed without hidden failures—holds.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence 'detailed the technical implementation' is grammatically incorrect and should read 'details the technical implementation.'

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for these comments, which correctly identify a gap in quantitative evaluation. We will revise the manuscript to address both points by adding systematic metrics on system performance.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript states that the system 'enables biologists to specify analysis tasks in natural language' and 'demonstrate[s] real biological microscopy image analysis workflows,' yet supplies no success rates, intervention counts, task-coverage statistics, error rates, or comparison against manual scripting baselines. This leaves the central claim that the sub-agent architecture reliably produces correct scripts untested.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract overstates reliability without supporting numbers. The original manuscript presents the system architecture and illustrative workflows rather than a benchmark study. In revision we will add a dedicated evaluation section reporting success rates, human intervention counts, task coverage, and common failure modes across a held-out prompt set, and will tone down the abstract accordingly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Demonstrations] Demonstrations section (implied by the abstract's claim of real workflows): the absence of any quantitative validation (e.g., fraction of prompts that required human correction, plugin-compatibility failure modes, or agreement with ground-truth segmentations) makes it impossible to assess whether the weakest assumption—that NL prompts plus the multi-agent loop succeed without hidden failures—holds.

    Authors: The demonstrations were provided as concrete examples of end-to-end usage rather than as a controlled study. We accept that this leaves the reliability claim untested. The revised version will expand the demonstrations section with quantitative results, including the fraction of prompts requiring correction, observed plugin-compatibility issues, and, where ground-truth annotations exist, agreement metrics with manual or other-tool segmentations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: system description with no derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

The paper is a design and implementation description of a multi-agent AI system for ImageJ/Fiji image analysis. It introduces architecture, sub-agents for plugin management/code generation/debugging/QA, and demonstrates workflows, but contains no equations, fitted parameters, predictions, uniqueness theorems, or derivation chains. No load-bearing steps reduce to self-citation or input-by-construction. The central claims are about system capabilities and reproducibility, which are presented as engineering outcomes rather than derived results. This matches the default expectation of no significant circularity for non-mathematical system papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the description relies on standard assumptions about LLM reliability and ImageJ plugin interfaces that are not enumerated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5686 in / 1092 out tokens · 21133 ms · 2026-06-28T11:44:28.522855+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Nature Methods 9(7), 676–682 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019

    Schindelin, J., Arganda-Carreras, I., Frise, E., Kaynig, V., Longair, M., Pietzsch, T., Preibisch, S., Rueden, C., Saalfeld, S., Schmid, B., Tinevez, J.-Y., White, D.J., Hartenstein, V., Eliceiri, K., Toman- cak, P., Cardona, A.: Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nature Methods 9(7), 676–682 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019

    work page doi:10.1038/nmeth.2019 2012

  2. [2]

    Nature Methods9(7), 671–675 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089

    Schneider, C.A., Rasband, W.S., Eliceiri, K.W.: NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nature Methods9(7), 671–675 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089

    work page doi:10.1038/nmeth.2089 2012

  3. [3]

    PLOS Biology17(6), 3000340 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000340

    Rueden, C.T., Ackerman, J., Arena, E.T., Eglinger, J., Cimini, B.A., Goodman, A., Carpenter, A.E., Eliceiri, K.W.: Scientific community image forum: A discussion forum for scientific image software. PLOS Biology17(6), 3000340 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000340

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000340 2019

  4. [4]

    bioRxiv (2024) https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.19.590278

    Haase, R., Tischer, C., H´ erich´ e, J.-K., Scherf, N.: Benchmarking large language models for bio-image analysis code generation. bioRxiv (2024) https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.19.590278

    work page doi:10.1101/2024.04.19.590278 2024

  5. [5]

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.13399

    Burgess, J., Nirschl, J.J., Bravo-S´ anchez, L., Lozano, A., Gupte, S.R., Galaz-Montoya, J.G., Zhang, Y., Su, Y., Bhowmik, D., Coman, Z., Hasan, S.M., Johannesson, A., Leineweber, W.D., Nair, M.G., Yarlagadda, R., Zuraski, C., Chiu, W., Cohen, S., Hansen, J.N., Leonetti, M.D., Liu, C., Lundberg, E., Yeung-Levy, S.: MicroVQA: A Multimodal Reasoning Benchma...

    arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    arXiv (2025)

    Beurer-Kellner, L., Buesser, B., Cret ¸u, A.-M., Debenedetti, E., Dobos, D., Fabian, D., Fischer, M., Froelicher, D., Grosse, K., Naeff, D., Ozoani, E., Paverd, A., Tram` er, F., Volhejn, V.: Design Patterns for Securing LLM Agents against Prompt Injections. arXiv (2025). https://doi.org/10. 48550/ARXIV.2506.08837

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    https://www.imagejpipelinebuilder.com Accessed 2026-05-22

    Buswinka, C.: ImageJ Pipeline Builder (IJPB): Natural-language Image Analysis Automation for ImageJ. https://www.imagejpipelinebuilder.com Accessed 2026-05-22

    2026

  8. [8]

    Chan Zuckerberg Biohub San Francisco

    Theodoro, I., Royer Lab: napari-mcp: An MCP Server for AI-powered Napari Control. Chan Zuckerberg Biohub San Francisco. https://github.com/royerlab/napari-mcp Accessed 2026-05-22

    2026

  9. [9]

    Nature Methods21, 1368–1370 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-024-02370-y

    Lei, W., Fuster-Barcel´ o, C., Reder, G., Mu˜ noz-Barrutia, A., Ouyang, W.: BioImage.IO Chatbot: a community-driven AI assistant for integrative computational bioimaging. Nature Methods21, 1368–1370 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-024-02370-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-024-02370-y 2024

  10. [10]

    bioRxiv (2025) https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.30.656746

    Huang, K., Zhang, S., Wang, H., Qu, Y., Lu, Y., Roohani, Y., Li, R., Qiu, L., Li, G., Zhang, J., Yin, D., Marwaha, S., Carter, J.N., Zhou, X., Wheeler, M., Bernstein, J.A., Wang, M., He, P., Zhou, J., Snyder, M., Cong, L., Regev, A., Leskovec, J.: Biomni: A general-purpose biomedical ai agent. bioRxiv (2025) https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.30.656746

    work page doi:10.1101/2025.05.30.656746 2025

  11. [11]

    https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference

    OpenAI: OpenAI API. https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference. Accessed: 2026-05-26 (2026)

    2026

  12. [12]

    https://openrouter.ai/docs

    OpenRouter: OpenRouter API: A Unified Interface for LLMs. https://openrouter.ai/docs. Accessed: 2026-05-26 (2026)

    2026

  13. [13]

    napari: a multi-dimensional image viewer for python,

    Sofroniew, N., Lambert, T., Bokota, G., Nunez-Iglesias, J., Sobolewski, P., Sweet, A., Gaifas, L., Evans, K., Burt, A., Doncila Pop, D., Yamauchi, K., Weber Mendon¸ ca, M., Rodr´ ıguez-Guerra, J., Liu, L., Buckley, G., Vierdag, W.-M., Anderson, A., Monko, T., Willing, C., Rodr´ ıguez-Reza, C.M., Royer, L., Can Solak, A., Harrington, K.I.S., Abramo, J., Ah...

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3555620 2026

  14. [14]

    Scientific Reports13(1) (2023) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50227-9

    Holme, B., Bjørnerud, B., Pedersen, N.M., Ballina, L.R., Wesche, J., Haugsten, E.M.: Automated tracking of cell migration in phase contrast images with celltraxx. Scientific Reports13(1) (2023) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50227-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-023-50227-9 2023

  15. [15]

    09.03.458852

    Ershov, D., Phan, M.-S., Pylv¨ an¨ ainen, J.W., Rigaud, S.U., Le Blanc, L., Charles-Orszag, A., Conway, J.R.W., Laine, R.F., Roy, N.H., Bonazzi, D., Dum´ enil, G., Jacquemet, G., Tinevez, J.-Y.: Bringing trackmate into the era of machine-learning and deep-learning (2021) https://doi.org/10.1101/2021. 09.03.458852

    work page doi:10.1101/2021 2021

  16. [16]

    JCI Insight8(14) (2023) https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.169020

    Baars, I., Jaedtka, M., Dewitz, L.-A., Fu, Y., Franz, T., Mohr, J., Gintschel, P., Berlin, H., Degen, A., Freier, S., Rygol, S., Schraven, B., Kahlfuß, S., Zandbergen, G., M¨ uller, A.J.: Leishmania major drives host phagocyte death and cell-to-cell transfer depending on intracellular pathogen proliferation rate. JCI Insight8(14) (2023) https://doi.org/10...

    work page doi:10.1172/jci.insight.169020 2023

  17. [17]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing7(1), 27–41 (1998)

    Th´ evenaz, P., Ruttimann, U.E., Unser, M.: A pyramid approach to subpixel registration based on intensity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing7(1), 27–41 (1998)

    1998

  18. [18]

    Schmied, C., Nelson, M.S., Avilov, S., Bakker, G.-J., Bertocchi, C., Bischof, J., Boehm, U., Brocher, J., Carvalho, M.T., Chiritescu, C., Christopher, J., Cimini, B.A., Conde-Sousa, E., Ebner, M., Ecker, R., Eliceiri, K., Fernandez-Rodriguez, J., Gaudreault, N., Gelman, L., Grunwald, D., Gu, T., Halidi, N., Hammer, M., Hartley, M., Held, M., Jug, F., Kapo...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-023-01987-9 2024

  19. [19]

    Contemporary Educational Technology17(2), 567 (2025) https://doi.org/10

    Kiran, K., Saat, R.M., Demeester, L., Lew, M.D.N., Neo, W.L., Pausawasdi, N., Nopparatjamjomras, T.R.: Technology-enhanced personalized learning: Lessons from online teaching at three south- east asian universities. Contemporary Educational Technology17(2), 567 (2025) https://doi.org/10. 30935/cedtech/15946

    2025

  20. [20]

    https://bioimagebook.github.io/

    Bankhead, P.: Introduction to Bioimage Analysis. https://bioimagebook.github.io/. Accessed May 2026 (2023)

    2026

  21. [21]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10465773

    Haase, R., Lampert, M., Witz, G., Korten, T., Ankenbrand, M.J., Kugler, E., Zoccoler, M., Fernandes, M., Taylor, S., Ray, A.: haesleinhuepf/BioImageAnalysisNotebooks: Gpt-2024.1.6. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10465773 . CC-BY 4.0 & BSD-3. https://haesleinhuepf.github.io/ BioImageAnalysisNotebooks/intro.html 25

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.10465773 2024

  22. [22]

    Social Sciences &; Humanities Open12, 101751 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho

    N´ emeth, R., T´ atrai, A., Szab´ o, M., Zaletnyik, P.T., Tam´ asi, a.: Exploring the use of retrieval- augmented generation models in higher education: A pilot study on artificial intelligence-based tutoring. Social Sciences &; Humanities Open12, 101751 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho. 2025.101751

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ssaho 2025

  23. [23]

    Nature Communications11(1) (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-020-14529-0

    Roels, J., Vernaillen, F., Kremer, A., Gon¸ calves, A., Aelterman, J., Luong, H.Q., Goossens, B., Philips, W., Lippens, S., Saeys, Y.: An interactive imagej plugin for semi-automated image denoising in electron microscopy. Nature Communications11(1) (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-020-14529-0

    2020

  24. [24]

    PLOS Computational Biology20(9), 1012375 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012375

    Rokem, A.: Ten simple rules for scientific code review. PLOS Computational Biology20(9), 1012375 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012375

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012375 2024

  25. [25]

    https://www

    Riverbank Computing: PyQt: Python Bindings for the Qt Application Framework. https://www. riverbankcomputing.com/software/pyqt/. Accessed: 2026-05-26 (2026)

    2026

  26. [26]

    Accessed: 2026

    AI, L.: Deepagents. Accessed: 2026. https://github.com/langchain-ai/deepagents

    2026

  27. [27]

    https://sites.imagej.net/sites.json

    ImageJ Project: ImageJ Update Sites Metadata Index (sites.json). https://sites.imagej.net/sites.json. Data repository file; accessed May 2026 (2026)

    2026

  28. [28]

    Bioinformatics32(22), 3532–3534 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1093/ bioinformatics/btw413

    Legland, D., Arganda-Carreras, I., Andrey, P.: Morpholibj: integrated library and plugins for mathe- matical morphology with imagej. Bioinformatics32(22), 3532–3534 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1093/ bioinformatics/btw413

    2016

  29. [29]

    In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2018

    Schmidt, U., Weigert, M., Broaddus, C., Myers, G.: Cell detection with star-convex polygons. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11071, pp. 265–273. Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2018). https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-00934-2 30

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-00934-2 2018

  30. [30]

    Frontiers in Computer Science4 (2022) https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2022.777728

    Arzt, M., Deschamps, J., Schmied, C., Pietzsch, T., Schmidt, D., Tomancak, P., Haase, R., Jug, F.: Labkit: Labeling and segmentation toolkit for big image data. Frontiers in Computer Science4 (2022) https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2022.777728

    work page doi:10.3389/fcomp.2022.777728 2022

  31. [31]

    https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw

    OpenClaw Team: OpenClaw. https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw

  32. [32]

    AgentTrust: Runtime Safety Evaluation and Interception for AI Agent Tool Use

    Yang, C.: AgentTrust: Runtime Safety Evaluation and Interception for AI Agent Tool Use (2026). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.04785

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.04785 2026

  33. [33]

    Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks

    Lewis, P., Perez, E., Piktus, A., Petroni, F., Karpukhin, V., Goyal, N., K¨ uttler, H., Lewis, M., Yih, W.-t., Rockt¨ aschel, T., Riedel, S., Kiela, D.: Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge- Intensive NLP Tasks. arXiv (2020). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2005.11401

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.11401 2020

  34. [34]

    In: Proceedings of the 32nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

    Cormack, G.V., Clarke, C.L.A., Buettcher, S.: Reciprocal rank fusion outperforms condorcet and individual rank learning methods. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. SIGIR ’09, pp. 758–759. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2009). https://doi.org/10.1145/...

    work page doi:10.1145/1571941.1572114 2009

  35. [35]

    Accessed: 2026-05-18

    Anthropic: Agent Skills: a standardized way to give AI agents new capabilities and expertise. Accessed: 2026-05-18. https://agentskills.io/home (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    arXiv 26 (2024)

    Shankar, S., Zamfirescu-Pereira, J.D., Hartmann, B., Parameswaran, A.G., Arawjo, I.: Who Validates the Validators? Aligning LLM-Assisted Evaluation of LLM Outputs with Human Preferences. arXiv 26 (2024). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2404.12272

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.12272 2024

  37. [37]

    Stureborg, R., Alikaniotis, D., Suhara, Y.: Large Language Models are Inconsistent and Biased Evaluators (2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK (2014)

    Bankhead, P.: Analyzing Fluorescence Microscopy Images with ImageJ. Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK (2014). No DOI or ISBN issued – self-published handbook. Semantic Scholar Cor- pusID:18910833. Originally drafted at the Nikon Imaging Center, Heidelberg University (2010– 2012); later evolved into the online book at https://bioimagebook.github.io. ...

    2014

  39. [39]

    (eds.): Bioimage Data Analysis Workflows – Advanced Components and Methods

    Miura, K., Sladoje, N. (eds.): Bioimage Data Analysis Workflows – Advanced Components and Methods. Learning Materials in Biosciences. Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2022). https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-76394-7 . Open-access; companion to the earlier Miura & Sladoje (2020) volume. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-76394-7

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-76394-7 2022

  40. [40]

    PLOS Biology21(6), 3002167 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002167

    Senft, R.A., Diaz-Rohrer, B., Colarusso, P., Swift, L., Jamali, N., Jambor, H., Pengo, T., Brideau, C., Montero Llopis, P., Uhlmann, V., Kirk, J., Gonzales, K.A., Bankhead, P., Evans III, E.L., Eli- ceiri, K.W., Cimini, B.A.: A biologist’s guide to planning and performing quantitative bioimaging experiments. PLOS Biology21(6), 3002167 (2023) https://doi.o...

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002167 2023

  41. [41]

    A biologist’s guide to planning and performing quantitative bioimaging experiments

    COBA-NIH and contributors: MicroscopyForBeginnersReferenceGuide: Companion website to “A biologist’s guide to planning and performing quantitative bioimaging experiments”. https://www.bioimagingguide.org/welcome.html. GitHub: https://github.com/COBA-NIH/ MicroscopyForBeginnersReferenceGuide; BSD-3 License. Companion to [40] (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    National Institutes of Health, USA, (2012)

    Ferreira, T., Rasband, W.S.: ImageJ User Guide – IJ 1.46r. National Institutes of Health, USA, (2012). National Institutes of Health, USA. Revised October 2012. https://imagej.net/ij/docs/guide/ user-guide.pdf

    2012

  43. [43]

    Monash University

    Nowell, C.J.: Fiji Training Manual (v6.5). Monash University. Monash Institute of Pharmaceuti- cal Science; CC-BY 4.0 (2023). https://doi.org/10.26180/21901989 . https://bridges.monash.edu/ articles/educational resource/Fiji Training Manual v6 5 /21901989

    work page doi:10.26180/21901989 2023

  44. [44]

    https://neubias.github.io/ training-resources/

    NEUBIAS Community: Bioimage Analysis Training Resources. https://neubias.github.io/ training-resources/. GitHub: https://github.com/NEUBIAS/training-resources; CC-BY 4.0. Water- shed module: https://neubias.github.io/training-resources/watershed/index.html (2019–2026)

    2019

  45. [45]

    Bioinformatics32(22), 3532–3534 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1093/ bioinformatics/btw413

    Legland, D., Arganda-Carreras, I., Andrey, P.: MorphoLibJ: integrated library and plugins for mathe- matical morphology with ImageJ. Bioinformatics32(22), 3532–3534 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1093/ bioinformatics/btw413

    2016

  46. [46]

    F1000Research Slides 9:1378 (2020)

    Legland, D., Arganda-Carreras, I., Andrey, P.: Mathematical morphology with morphoLibJ [NEU- BIAS Academy@Home webinar slides]. F1000Research Slides 9:1378 (2020). https://doi.org/10. 7490/f1000research.1118396.1 . https://f1000research.com/slides/9-1378

    2020

  47. [47]

    F1000Research Slides 9:625

    Boudier, T.: Introduction to 3D Analysis with 3D ImageJ Suite [NEUBIAS Academy@Home webinar slides]. F1000Research Slides 9:625. Slides also available at https://f1000research.com/slides/9-625; video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPC2kP-5By4 (2020). https://imagej.net/media/ plugins/3d-imagej-suite/neubias-3dsuite.pdf

    2020

  48. [48]

    Bioinformatics29(14), 1840–1841 27 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt276

    Ollion, J., Cochennec, J., Loll, F., Escud´ e, C., Boudier, T.: TANGO: a generic tool for high- throughput 3D image analysis for studying nuclear organization. Bioinformatics29(14), 1840–1841 27 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt276 . Primary citation requested by the 3D ImageJ Suite authors. 28

    work page doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt276 2013