ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2011
Automatically identifying and annotating mouse embryo gene expression patterns.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple-model machine learning identifies potential functional genes in dilated cardiomyopathy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Representation of anatomy in online atlases and databases: a survey and collection of patterns for interface design.BMC developmental biology · 2016Article
- Toward routine use of 3D histopathology as a research tool.The American journal of pathology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationDeciphering the regulatory and developmental mechanisms for multicellular organisms requires detailed knowledge of gene interactions and gene expressions. The availability of large datasets with both spatial and ontological annotation of the spatio-temporal patterns of gene expression in mouse embryo provides a powerful resource to discover the biological function of embryo organization. Ontological annotation of gene expressions consists of labelling images with terms from the anatomy ontology for mouse development. If the spatial genes of an anatomical component are expressed in an image, the image is then tagged with a term of that anatomical component. The current annotation is done manually by domain experts, which is both time consuming and costly. In addition, the level of detail is variable, and inevitably errors arise from the tedious nature of the task. In this article, we present a new method to automatically identify and annotate gene expression patterns in the mouse embryo with anatomical terms.
resultsThe method takes images from in situ hybridization studies and the ontology for the developing mouse embryo, it then combines machine learning and image processing techniques to produce classifiers that automatically identify and annotate gene expression patterns in these images. We evaluate our method on image data from the EURExpress study, where we use it to automatically classify nine anatomical terms: humerus, handplate, fibula, tibia, femur, ribs, petrous part, scapula and head mesenchyme. The accuracy of our method lies between 70% and 80% with few exceptions. We show that other known methods have lower classification performance than ours. We have investigated the images misclassified by our method and found several cases where the original annotation was not correct. This shows our method is robust against this kind of noise. AVAILABILITY: The annotation result and the experimental dataset in the article can be freely accessed at http://www2.docm.mmu.ac.uk/STAFF/L.Han/geneannotation/. CONTACT: l.han@mmu.ac.uk SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.