Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22087288›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

A novel validation algorithm allows for automated cell tracking and the extraction of biologically meaningful parameters.

Daniel H Rapoport, Tim Becker, Amir Madany Mamlouk, Simone Schicktanz, Charli Kruse

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Ensemble Deep Learning Object Detection Fusion for Cell Tracking, Mitosis, and Lineage.IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology · 2024
    Article
  4. Multi-feature-Based Robust Cell Tracking.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022
    Article
  7. DMNet: Dual-Stream Marker Guided Deep Network for Dense Cell Segmentation and Lineage Tracking.... IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision workshops. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Evaluation of Deep Learning Strategies for Nucleus Segmentation in Fluorescence Images.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Global linking of cell tracks using the Viterbi algorithm.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2015
    Article
  16. A benchmark for comparison of cell tracking algorithms.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel H RapoportFraunhofer Institution for Marine Biotechnology, Lübeck, Germany.
Tim Becker
Amir Madany Mamlouk
Simone Schicktanz
Charli Kruse
Fraunhofer Research Institution for Individualized and Cell-Based Medical Engineering · DEUniversity of Lübeck · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated microscopy is currently the only method to non-invasively and label-free observe complex multi-cellular processes, such as cell migration, cell cycle, and cell differentiation. Extracting biological information from a time-series of micrographs requires each cell to be recognized and followed through sequential microscopic snapshots. Although recent attempts to automatize this process resulted in ever improving cell detection rates, manual identification of identical cells is still the most reliable technique. However, its tedious and subjective nature prevented tracking from becoming a standardized tool for the investigation of cell cultures. Here, we present a novel method to accomplish automated cell tracking with a reliability comparable to manual tracking. Previously, automated cell tracking could not rival the reliability of manual tracking because, in contrast to the human way of solving this task, none of the algorithms had an independent quality control mechanism; they missed validation. Thus, instead of trying to improve the cell detection or tracking rates, we proceeded from the idea to automatically inspect the tracking results and accept only those of high trustworthiness, while rejecting all other results. This validation algorithm works independently of the quality of cell detection and tracking through a systematic search for tracking errors. It is based only on very general assumptions about the spatiotemporal contiguity of cell paths. While traditional tracking often aims to yield genealogic information about single cells, the natural outcome of a validated cell tracking algorithm turns out to be a set of complete, but often unconnected cell paths, i.e. records of cells from mitosis to mitosis. This is a consequence of the fact that the validation algorithm takes complete paths as the unit of rejection/acceptance. The resulting set of complete paths can be used to automatically extract important biological parameters with high reliability and statistical significance. These include the distribution of life/cycle times and cell areas, as well as of the symmetry of cell divisions and motion analyses. The new algorithm thus allows for the quantification and parameterization of cell culture with unprecedented accuracy. To evaluate our validation algorithm, two large reference data sets were manually created. These data sets comprise more than 320,000 unstained adult pancreatic stem cells from rat, including 2592 mitotic events. The reference data sets specify every cell position and shape, and assign each cell to the correct branch of its genealogic tree. We provide these reference data sets for free use by others as a benchmark for the future improvement of automated tracking methods.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsValidation Studies as TopicAnimalsAutomation, LaboratoryCell CycleCell MovementCell ShapeCytological TechniquesDatabases, FactualMethodsMicroscopyMitosisPancreasRatsStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID22087288
PMCPMC3210784
OpenAlexW1987863230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.