Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25145678›Full record

ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2014

From voxels to knowledge: a practical guide to the segmentation of complex electron microscopy 3D-data.

Wen-Ting Tsai, Ahmed Hassan, Purbasha Sarkar, Joaquin Correa, Zoltan Metlagel, Danielle M Jorgens, Manfred Auer

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. SuRVoS: Super-Region Volume Segmentation workbench.Journal of structural biology · 2017
    Article
  8. Quantifying Variability of Manual Annotation in Cryo-Electron Tomograms.Microscopy and microanalysis : the official journal of Microscopy Society of America, Microbeam Analysis Society, Microscopical Society of Canada · 2016
    Article
  9. Article
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

7 authors.

Wen-Ting TsaiLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Ahmed HassanLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Purbasha SarkarJoint Bioenergy Institute, Physical Biosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Joaquin CorreaLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Zoltan MetlagelLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Danielle M JorgensLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Manfred AuerLife Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Joint Bioenergy Institute, Physical Biosciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; mauer@lbl.gov.

Funding

TUBULIN STRUCTURE BY ELECTRON CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP01GM051487 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI CATE, JAMIE H · 1994 to 2018
$27.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS P01 GM051487
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern 3D electron microscopy approaches have recently allowed unprecedented insight into the 3D ultrastructural organization of cells and tissues, enabling the visualization of large macromolecular machines, such as adhesion complexes, as well as higher-order structures, such as the cytoskeleton and cellular organelles in their respective cell and tissue context. Given the inherent complexity of cellular volumes, it is essential to first extract the features of interest in order to allow visualization, quantification, and therefore comprehension of their 3D organization. Each data set is defined by distinct characteristics, e.g., signal-to-noise ratio, crispness (sharpness) of the data, heterogeneity of its features, crowdedness of features, presence or absence of characteristic shapes that allow for easy identification, and the percentage of the entire volume that a specific region of interest occupies. All these characteristics need to be considered when deciding on which approach to take for segmentation. The six different 3D ultrastructural data sets presented were obtained by three different imaging approaches: resin embedded stained electron tomography, focused ion beam- and serial block face- scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM, SBF-SEM) of mildly stained and heavily stained samples, respectively. For these data sets, four different segmentation approaches have been applied: (1) fully manual model building followed solely by visualization of the model, (2) manual tracing segmentation of the data followed by surface rendering, (3) semi-automated approaches followed by surface rendering, or (4) automated custom-designed segmentation algorithms followed by surface rendering and quantitative analysis. Depending on the combination of data set characteristics, it was found that typically one of these four categorical approaches outperforms the others, but depending on the exact sequence of criteria, more than one approach may be successful. Based on these data, we propose a triage scheme that categorizes both objective data set characteristics and subjective personal criteria for the analysis of the different data sets.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArabidopsisCell WallEpithelial CellsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMammary Glands, HumanMicroscopy, Electron

Identifiers

PMID25145678
PMCPMC4448944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.