Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39234390›Full record

ArticleNpj imaging2024

Quantitative microbiology with widefield microscopy: navigating optical artefacts for accurate interpretations.

Georgeos Hardo, Ruizhe Li, Somenath Bakshi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Npj imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Georgeos HardoDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Ruizhe LiDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Somenath BakshiDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Time-resolved live-cell imaging using widefield microscopy is instrumental in quantitative microbiology research. It allows researchers to track and measure the size, shape, and content of individual microbial cells over time. However, the small size of microbial cells poses a significant challenge in interpreting image data, as their dimensions approache that of the microscope's depth of field, and they begin to experience significant diffraction effects. As a result, 2D widefield images of microbial cells contain projected 3D information, blurred by the 3D point spread function. In this study, we employed simulations and targeted experiments to investigate the impact of diffraction and projection on our ability to quantify the size and content of microbial cells from 2D microscopic images. This study points to some new and often unconsidered artefacts resulting from the interplay of projection and diffraction effects, within the context of quantitative microbiology. These artefacts introduce substantial errors and biases in size, fluorescence quantification, and even single-molecule counting, making the elimination of these errors a complex task. Awareness of these artefacts is crucial for designing strategies to accurately interpret micrographs of microbes. To address this, we present new experimental designs and machine learning-based analysis methods that account for these effects, resulting in accurate quantification of microbiological processes.

Indexed as

Cellular imagingImagingImaging and sensingMicroscopyPhase-contrast microscopySingle-cell imagingWide-field fluorescence microscopy

Identifiers

PMID39234390
PMCPMC11368818

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.