matlab 2015a environment Search Results


computing software environment  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc computing software environment
Computing Software Environment, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/computing software environment/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
computing software environment - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
2015a  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc 2015a
2015a, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/2015a/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
2015a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
environment, version r2012-2015a  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc environment, version r2012-2015a
Environment, Version R2012 2015a, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/environment, version r2012-2015a/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
environment, version r2012-2015a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
matlab environment  (MathWorks Inc)
96
MathWorks Inc matlab environment
Matlab Environment, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/matlab environment/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matlab environment - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
matlab 2015a  (MathWorks Inc)
93
MathWorks Inc matlab 2015a
Matlab 2015a, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/matlab 2015a/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matlab 2015a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
93/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
stemcellqc  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc stemcellqc
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Stemcellqc, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/stemcellqc/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
stemcellqc - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
matconvnet toolbox  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc matconvnet toolbox
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Matconvnet Toolbox, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/matconvnet toolbox/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matconvnet toolbox - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
matconvnet  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc matconvnet
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Matconvnet, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/matconvnet/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matconvnet - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
psychtoolbox-3  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc psychtoolbox-3
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Psychtoolbox 3, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/psychtoolbox-3/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
psychtoolbox-3 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
matconvnet toolbox ver.24  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc matconvnet toolbox ver.24
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Matconvnet Toolbox Ver.24, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/matconvnet toolbox ver.24/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matconvnet toolbox ver.24 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
ps-svr-lat  (MathWorks Inc)
90
MathWorks Inc ps-svr-lat
Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). <t>StemCellQC</t> data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm
Ps Svr Lat, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/ps-svr-lat/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ps-svr-lat - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). StemCellQC data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm

Journal: Stem Cells Translational Medicine

Article Title: Video bioinformatics analysis of human pluripotent stem cell morphology, quality, and cellular dynamics

doi: 10.1002/sctm.15-0352

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of the morphology and dynamic features in small and large phenotype colonies. A,B, Morphology of hESCs with the small cell phenotype. C,D, Morphology of hESCs with the large cell phenotype. E,F, Neural rosettes and neurons formed from small phenotype colonies. G,H, Absence of rosettes and neurons when large phenotype colonies were incubated in neurogenesis differentiating medium. I, Solidities of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. J, Number of protrusions on small and large phenotype colonies were not significantly different. K, Areas of large and small phenotype colonies were not significantly different. L, The average intensity the small and large phenotypes were significantly different between 1 and 46 hours ( P values were all <.001). M, Total displacement of large and small phenotypes was significantly different between 28 and 46 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). N, Total distance traveled for small and large phenotypes became significantly different between hours 15 and 46 ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). StemCellQC data are plotted as means ± the SEM of three independent experiments in which each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the average intensity data prior to performing a two‐way ANOVA with Bonferroni's post hoc test. * indicates significant differences. Scale bar = 25 μm

Article Snippet: StemCellQC was written and developed with the MATLAB 2015a programming environment.

Techniques: Incubation, Transformation Assay

Analysis of apoptosis using the brightness/area ratio feature during culture in mTeSR1‐A. A‐D, Phase contrast image film strip of dying cells (yellow arrows) being extruded to the top of a hESC colony cultured on Matrigel. E‐P, Examples of dead cells (bright areas) on the surface of the colonies cultured on Matrigel (E‐H), Geltrex (I‐L), and laminin‐521 (M‐P). Colonies were segmented using StemCellQC (red line). Q, MitoSox Red staining of apoptotic cells on the surface of a colony. R, Trypan blue staining of cells undergoing apoptosis on the surface of a colony. S, StemCellQC brightness/area ratio analysis of colonies cultured on Matrigel, Geltrex, and laminin‐521. For brightness/area ratio data, laminin‐521 was significantly different from Matrigel between hours 1 and 46 of the experiment ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). Geltrex was significantly different from Matrigel between 28 and 48 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). StemCellQC data are means ± SE of three independent experiments where each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the brightness/ratio parameter prior to performing the two‐way ANOVA. The Dunnett's post hoc test used Matrigel as a reference group. * indicates range over which means were significantly different. Scale bars: I‐O = 20 μm; Q‐R = 15 μm

Journal: Stem Cells Translational Medicine

Article Title: Video bioinformatics analysis of human pluripotent stem cell morphology, quality, and cellular dynamics

doi: 10.1002/sctm.15-0352

Figure Lengend Snippet: Analysis of apoptosis using the brightness/area ratio feature during culture in mTeSR1‐A. A‐D, Phase contrast image film strip of dying cells (yellow arrows) being extruded to the top of a hESC colony cultured on Matrigel. E‐P, Examples of dead cells (bright areas) on the surface of the colonies cultured on Matrigel (E‐H), Geltrex (I‐L), and laminin‐521 (M‐P). Colonies were segmented using StemCellQC (red line). Q, MitoSox Red staining of apoptotic cells on the surface of a colony. R, Trypan blue staining of cells undergoing apoptosis on the surface of a colony. S, StemCellQC brightness/area ratio analysis of colonies cultured on Matrigel, Geltrex, and laminin‐521. For brightness/area ratio data, laminin‐521 was significantly different from Matrigel between hours 1 and 46 of the experiment ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). Geltrex was significantly different from Matrigel between 28 and 48 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). StemCellQC data are means ± SE of three independent experiments where each experiment had 8‐11 colonies. A Box‐Cox transformation was applied to the brightness/ratio parameter prior to performing the two‐way ANOVA. The Dunnett's post hoc test used Matrigel as a reference group. * indicates range over which means were significantly different. Scale bars: I‐O = 20 μm; Q‐R = 15 μm

Article Snippet: StemCellQC was written and developed with the MATLAB 2015a programming environment.

Techniques: Stripping Membranes, Cell Culture, Staining, Transformation Assay

StemCellQC analysis of H9 hESCs, H1 hESCs, and CC3 iPSCs. A, Solidity comparisons to H9: the CC3 cells were significantly lower during two early time intervals ( P values ranged from .05 to .001), while the H1 line was significantly different between 1 and 48 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). B, Area comparisons to H9: the CC3 cells were significantly lower between 23 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001), while the H1 line was significantly lower between 32 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). C‐H, Phase contrast images showing brightness on the surface of the three cell lines at the beginning and end of culture. I, Brightness/area ratio comparisons to H9: the CC3 line was significantly higher for most time points between 1‐23 and 45‐70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001), while the H1 line was significantly higher between 22‐70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .01). J‐L, H9, H1 and CC3 colonies showing the direction and path of movement on each colony (red line). M, Total distance traveled comparisons to H9: the H1 line was significantly higher between 8 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001), while the CC3 line was significantly higher between 46 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). Total displacement comparisons to H9: the H1 line was significantly lower in total displacement between 15 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001. * indicates significant differences. Scale bars G‐H = 15 μm; J‐L = 10 μm

Journal: Stem Cells Translational Medicine

Article Title: Video bioinformatics analysis of human pluripotent stem cell morphology, quality, and cellular dynamics

doi: 10.1002/sctm.15-0352

Figure Lengend Snippet: StemCellQC analysis of H9 hESCs, H1 hESCs, and CC3 iPSCs. A, Solidity comparisons to H9: the CC3 cells were significantly lower during two early time intervals ( P values ranged from .05 to .001), while the H1 line was significantly different between 1 and 48 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). B, Area comparisons to H9: the CC3 cells were significantly lower between 23 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001), while the H1 line was significantly lower between 32 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001). C‐H, Phase contrast images showing brightness on the surface of the three cell lines at the beginning and end of culture. I, Brightness/area ratio comparisons to H9: the CC3 line was significantly higher for most time points between 1‐23 and 45‐70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001), while the H1 line was significantly higher between 22‐70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .01). J‐L, H9, H1 and CC3 colonies showing the direction and path of movement on each colony (red line). M, Total distance traveled comparisons to H9: the H1 line was significantly higher between 8 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001), while the CC3 line was significantly higher between 46 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .001). Total displacement comparisons to H9: the H1 line was significantly lower in total displacement between 15 and 70 hours ( P values ranged from .05 to .0001. * indicates significant differences. Scale bars G‐H = 15 μm; J‐L = 10 μm

Article Snippet: StemCellQC was written and developed with the MATLAB 2015a programming environment.

Techniques: