Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31083649›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2019

DoGNet: A deep architecture for synapse detection in multiplexed fluorescence images.

Victor Kulikov, Syuan-Ming Guo, Matthew Stone, Allen Goodman, Anne Carpenter, Mark Bathe, Victor Lempitsky

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Systematic data analysis pipeline for quantitative morphological cell phenotyping.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Victor KulikovCDISE, Skoltech, Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID 0000-0002-4264-8572
Syuan-Ming GuoDepartment of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Matthew StoneDepartment of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Allen GoodmanImaging Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Anne CarpenterImaging Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Mark BatheDepartment of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Victor LempitskyCDISE, Skoltech, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology · USBroad Institute · USSkolkovo Institute of Science and Technology · RU

Funding

Extracting rich information from biological imagesR35GM122547 · NIGMS · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI Anne E. Carpenter · 2017 to 2026
$6.2M
Simultaneous profiling of neuronal synapse activities, proteins, and messenger RNAs at the single-cell levelR01MH112694 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI Mark Bathe · 2017 to 2026
$2.8M
Ultra-Multiplexed Nanoscale In Situ Proteomics for Understanding Synapse TypesU01MH106011 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI BATHE, MARK, BOYDEN, EDWARD S. · 2014 to 2016
$2.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM122547NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH112694NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH106011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuronal synapses transmit electrochemical signals between cells through the coordinated action of presynaptic vesicles, ion channels, scaffolding and adapter proteins, and membrane receptors. In situ structural characterization of numerous synaptic proteins simultaneously through multiplexed imaging facilitates a bottom-up approach to synapse classification and phenotypic description. Objective automation of efficient and reliable synapse detection within these datasets is essential for the high-throughput investigation of synaptic features. Convolutional neural networks can solve this generalized problem of synapse detection, however, these architectures require large numbers of training examples to optimize their thousands of parameters. We propose DoGNet, a neural network architecture that closes the gap between classical computer vision blob detectors, such as Difference of Gaussians (DoG) filters, and modern convolutional networks. DoGNet is optimized to analyze highly multiplexed microscopy data. Its small number of training parameters allows DoGNet to be trained with few examples, which facilitates its application to new datasets without overfitting. We evaluate the method on multiplexed fluorescence imaging data from both primary mouse neuronal cultures and mouse cortex tissue slices. We show that DoGNet outperforms convolutional networks with a low-to-moderate number of training examples, and DoGNet is efficiently transferred between datasets collected from separate research groups. DoGNet synapse localizations can then be used to guide the segmentation of individual synaptic protein locations and spatial extents, revealing their spatial organization and relative abundances within individual synapses. The source code is publicly available: https://github.com/kulikovv/dognet.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalNeural Networks, ComputerAnimalsCerebral CortexComputational BiologyComputer SimulationDatabases, FactualImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMiceMicroscopy, Fluorescence, MultiphotonNerve Tissue ProteinsNeuronsSoftwareSynapsesSynaptic TransmissionNerve Tissue Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31083649
PMCPMC6533009
OpenAlexW2945047129

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.