Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25448819›Full record

ArticleJournal of bacteriology2015

New tools for comparing microscopy images: quantitative analysis of cell types in Bacillus subtilis.

Jordi van Gestel, Hera Vlamakis, Roberto Kolter

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bacteriology, 2015. 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Active interface bulging inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jordi van GestelDepartment of Microbiology and Immunobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA Theoretical Biology Group, Center for Ecological and Evolutionary Studies, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Hera VlamakisDepartment of Microbiology and Immunobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Roberto KolterDepartment of Microbiology and Immunobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA roberto_kolter@hms.harvard.edu.
Harvard University · USUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

MOLECULAR GENETICS OF BIOFILM FORMATIONR01GM058213 · NIGMS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI RUDNER, DAVID Z · 1998 to 2017
$7.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM58213NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM058213
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence microscopy is a method commonly used to examine individual differences between bacterial cells, yet many studies still lack a quantitative analysis of fluorescence microscopy data. Here we introduce some simple tools that microbiologists can use to analyze and compare their microscopy images. We show how image data can be converted to distribution data. These data can be subjected to a cluster analysis that makes it possible to objectively compare microscopy images. The distribution data can further be analyzed using distribution fitting. We illustrate our methods by scrutinizing two independently acquired data sets, each containing microscopy images of a doubly labeled Bacillus subtilis strain. For the first data set, we examined the expression of srfA and tapA, two genes which are expressed in surfactin-producing and matrix-producing cells, respectively. For the second data set, we examined the expression of eps and tapA; these genes are expressed in matrix-producing cells. We show that srfA is expressed by all cells in the population, a finding which contrasts with a previously reported bimodal distribution of srfA expression. In addition, we show that eps and tapA do not always have the same expression profiles, despite being expressed in the same cell type: both operons are expressed in cell chains, while single cells mainly express eps. These findings exemplify that the quantification and comparison of microscopy data can yield insights that otherwise would go unnoticed.

Indexed as

Bacillus subtilisBacterial ProteinsData MiningGene Expression Regulation, BacterialImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy, FluorescenceBacterial Proteins

Identifiers

PMID25448819
PMCPMC4334194
OpenAlexW2121799154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.