Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42531258›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

From manual counting to YOLO: Using computer vision to automate large-scale fecundity assays in C. elegans.

Linyao Peng, Hongyi Shui, Anne Nicole Janisch, Sarah Dede Hesse, Victoria Kathleen Feist, Amanda Kyle Gibson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Parasite defense covaries with reproductive timing, not with resistance.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Linyao PengDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7435-9900
Hongyi ShuiDepartment of Integrated Marketing Communications, Northwestern University, Evaston, Illinois, United States of America.
Anne Nicole JanischDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
Sarah Dede HesseDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
Victoria Kathleen FeistDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
Amanda Kyle GibsonDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.

Funding

A general test of the genetic basis of parasite resistance across genetic and environmental contextsR35GM137975 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI GIBSON, AMANDA K · 2020 to 2024
$2.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM137975
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fecundity measurements play a crucial role in life history research, providing insights into reproductive fitness, population dynamics, and environmental responses. In the model nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, fecundity assays are widely used to study development, aging, and genetic or environmental influences on reproduction. C. elegans hermaphrodites have large numbers of offspring (>100), so manual counting of viable offspring is time-consuming and susceptible to human error. Automated counting methods have the potential to enhance throughput, accuracy, and precision in data collection. We applied computer vision to 9972 images of broods from individual C. elegans hermaphrodites from several strains under multiple treatments to capture variation in fecundity. We trained models using You Only Look Once (YOLO) versions v8 to v11 (large and extra-large variants) to detect and count viable offspring, then compared the model results to estimates from manual counting. The best-performing model, YOLO v11-L, detected offspring with high accuracy after fine-tuning, achieving 92.6% recall and 94.9% precision. Manual counts differed from verified ground-truth counts by an average of 2.16 offspring per image, compared to 0.9 for the trained computer vision model. In addition, we detected significant effects of counter identity, experimental block, and their interaction on manual counts. Computer vision counts were not affected by these biases and outperformed manual counting in both speed, consistency, and accuracy. We demonstrate that computer vision can be a powerful tool for fecundity assays in C. elegans and provide a pipeline for applying this approach to new image sets. More broadly, applying computer vision to digital collections can advance ecological and evolutionary research by accelerating the study of fitness and life history. In practice, this reduces months of manual counting to about 2 hours on a consumer GPU, lowering barriers to large-scale fecundity assays.

Indexed as

Caenorhabditis elegansFertilityImage Processing, Computer-AssistedAnimals

Identifiers

PMID42531258
PMCPMC13423053

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.