Example of the method (correlation procedure) used to determine the best relationship between the LRP features and histology vertical section boundaries for the location shown by the
yellow bin in
Figures 1B1D . This method was applied to all 35 locations analyzed. (
A) Mean LRP and unscaled histology section with their respective boundaries (
circles: LRP boundaries;
horizontal lines: on histology denote histology boundaries). Each LRP boundary determines the mean of a Gaussian distribution (amplitude = 1, SD = 3 μm). The correlation was determined by summing the amplitude of the four Gaussian distributions at depths corresponding to the 10 histology boundaries (
gray lines under Gaussians). The only boundary constraint used was that LRP boundary T1 was within 2 μm of the inner limiting membrane histology boundary. Only one other histology boundary was aligned close to an LRP boundary (T3a) in this example, and so the normalized correlation when the histology was unscaled (i.e., scale factor = 1) was 0.5, as demonstrated in (
C). The LRP was divided into inner and outer regions. The outer LRP consisted of two peaks. The inner LRP was divided into three zones, based on the four LRP boundaries. The unscaled histology section was divided into three zones (

) after the histology boundaries that align with the LRP boundaries were identified (relevant in
equation 3 , to calculate axial zone shrinkage). (
B) Optimum alignment of the LRP and histology from (
A) after axial scaling of the histology image to achieve the highest correlation value. Histology boundaries were closely aligned with all LRP boundaries, so the normalized correlation approached a value of 1 as shown in (
C). Because the normalized correlation in (
B) is greater than that in (
A), it represents a better match between the LRP and histology boundaries. (
C) Normalized correlation as a function of histology scale (
bottom axis) and axial shrinkage (
top axis) for the specific retinal location shown in (
A) and (
B). The five local maxima (labeled 1– 5) indicate the scale (and inferred shrinkage) values that produce the best unique alignments between the LRP and histology boundaries, and represent five different possible solutions.
Gray lines: transitions between different solutions; a solution is deemed different when at least one LRP boundary aligns with a different histology boundary. Local maxima are ordered by peak correlation from 1 to 5, where 1 represents the highest correlation. The solution that gives the highest correlation (solution 1) is shown in (
B).
Dashed arrows: scale/shrinkage values for the LRP/histology relationships shown in (
A) and (
B). Scale and axial shrinkage are related according to
equation 2 . LRP transitions (T1, T2, T3a, T3b), histology sublaminae as in
Figure 2 . Scale bar, (
A,
B) 50 μm.