ArticleJournal of bacteriology2015
New tools for comparing microscopy images: quantitative analysis of cell types in Bacillus subtilis.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Active interface bulging inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- The ComX Quorum Sensing Peptide ofMicroorganisms · 2020Article
- Article
- Detection of antibiotics synthetized in microfluidic picolitre-droplets by various actinobacteria.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Inhibition of bacterial attachment and biofilm formation by a novel intravenous catheter material using an in vitro percutaneous catheter insertion model.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Article
- A Tool for Alignment and Averaging of Sparse Fluorescence Signals in Rod-Shaped Bacteria.Biophysical journal · 2016Article
- From cell differentiation to cell collectives: Bacillus subtilis uses division of labor to migrate.PLoS biology · 2015Article
- Phenoplant: a web resource for the exploration of large chlorophyll fluorescence image datasets.Plant methods · 2015Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
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.