ArticleJournal of microscopy2021
DeepFRAP: Fast fluorescence recovery after photobleaching data analysis using deep neural networks.
Article in Journal of microscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unlocking the black box: multimodal imaging and quantitative analysis of plant vesicular trafficking.Advanced biotechnology · 2026Review
- Receptor binding and tortuosity explain morphogen local-to-global diffusion coefficient transition.Biophysical journal · 2025Article
- MITIGATING OVER-SATURATED FLUORESCENCE IMAGES THROUGH A SEMI-SUPERVISED GENERATIVE ADVERSARIAL NETWORK.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging · 2024Article
- What's past is prologue: FRAP keeps delivering 50 years later.Biophysical journal · 2023Review
- Deep Q-learning to globally optimize aQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- DeepFRAP: Fast fluorescence recovery after photobleaching data analysis using deep neural networks.Journal of microscopy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional analysis of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) data for diffusion coefficient estimation typically involves fitting an analytical or numerical FRAP model to the recovery curve data using non-linear least squares. Depending on the model, this can be time consuming, especially for batch analysis of large numbers of data sets and if multiple initial guesses for the parameter vector are used to ensure convergence. In this work, we develop a completely new approach, DeepFRAP, utilizing machine learning for parameter estimation in FRAP. From a numerical FRAP model developed in previous work, we generate a very large set of simulated recovery curve data with realistic noise levels. The data are used for training different deep neural network regression models for prediction of several parameters, most importantly the diffusion coefficient. The neural networks are extremely fast and can estimate the parameters orders of magnitude faster than least squares. The performance of the neural network estimation framework is compared to conventional least squares estimation on simulated data, and found to be strikingly similar. Also, a simple experimental validation is performed, demonstrating excellent agreement between the two methods. We make the data and code used publicly available to facilitate further development of machine learning-based estimation in FRAP. LAY DESCRIPTION: Fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) is one of the most frequently used methods for microscopy-based diffusion measurements and broadly used in materials science, pharmaceutics, food science and cell biology. In a FRAP experiment, a laser is used to photobleach fluorescent particles in a region. By analysing the recovery of the fluorescence intensity due to the diffusion of still fluorescent particles, the diffusion coefficient and other parameters can be estimated. Typically, a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM) is used to image the time evolution of the recovery, and a model is fit using least squares to obtain parameter estimates. In this work, we introduce a new, fast and accurate method for analysis of data from FRAP. The new method is based on using artificial neural networks to predict parameter values, such as the diffusion coefficient, effectively circumventing classical least squares fitting. This leads to a dramatic speed-up, especially noticeable when analysing large numbers of FRAP data sets, while still producing results in excellent agreement with least squares. Further, the neural network estimates can be used as very good initial guesses for least squares estimation in order to make the least squares optimization convergence much faster than it otherwise would. This provides for obtaining, for example, diffusion coefficients as soon as possible, spending minimal time on data analysis. In this fashion, the proposed method facilitates efficient use of the experimentalist's time which is the main motivation to our approach. The concept is demonstrated on pure diffusion. However, the concept can easily be extended to the diffusion and binding case. The concept is likely to be useful in all application areas of FRAP, including diffusion in cells, gels and solutions.
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.