-
Something wrong with this record ?
Performance and sensitivity evaluation of 3D spot detection methods in confocal microscopy
K. Štěpka, P. Matula, P. Matula, S. Wörz, K. Rohr, M. Kozubek,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
NLK
Free Medical Journals
from 2003 to 1 year ago
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 2012-06-01 to 1 year ago
Wiley Free Content
from 2003 to 1 year ago
PubMed
26033916
DOI
10.1002/cyto.a.22692
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Algorithms MeSH
- Microscopy, Fluorescence methods MeSH
- Microscopy, Confocal methods MeSH
- Image Processing, Computer-Assisted methods MeSH
- Sensitivity and Specificity MeSH
- Imaging, Three-Dimensional methods MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
Reliable 3D detection of diffraction-limited spots in fluorescence microscopy images is an important task in subcellular observation. Generally, fluorescence microscopy images are heavily degraded by noise and non-specifically stained background, making reliable detection a challenging task. In this work, we have studied the performance and parameter sensitivity of eight recent methods for 3D spot detection. The study is based on both 3D synthetic image data and 3D real confocal microscopy images. The synthetic images were generated using a simulator modeling the complete imaging setup, including the optical path as well as the image acquisition process. We studied the detection performance and parameter sensitivity under different noise levels and under the influence of uneven background signal. To evaluate the parameter sensitivity, we propose a novel measure based on the gradient magnitude of the F1 score. We measured the success rate of the individual methods for different types of the image data and found that the type of image degradation is an important factor. Using the F1 score and the newly proposed sensitivity measure, we found that the parameter sensitivity is not necessarily proportional to the success rate of a method. This also provided an explanation why the best performing method for synthetic data was outperformed by other methods when applied to the real microscopy images. On the basis of the results obtained, we conclude with the recommendation of the HDome method for data with relatively low variations in quality, or the Sorokin method for image sets in which the quality varies more. We also provide alternative recommendations for high-quality images, and for situations in which detailed parameter tuning might be deemed expensive.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc16020719
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20160725113750.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 160722s2015 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1002/cyto.a.22692 $2 doi
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1002/cyto.a.22692 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)26033916
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Štěpka, Karel $u Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis, Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Performance and sensitivity evaluation of 3D spot detection methods in confocal microscopy / $c K. Štěpka, P. Matula, P. Matula, S. Wörz, K. Rohr, M. Kozubek,
- 520 9_
- $a Reliable 3D detection of diffraction-limited spots in fluorescence microscopy images is an important task in subcellular observation. Generally, fluorescence microscopy images are heavily degraded by noise and non-specifically stained background, making reliable detection a challenging task. In this work, we have studied the performance and parameter sensitivity of eight recent methods for 3D spot detection. The study is based on both 3D synthetic image data and 3D real confocal microscopy images. The synthetic images were generated using a simulator modeling the complete imaging setup, including the optical path as well as the image acquisition process. We studied the detection performance and parameter sensitivity under different noise levels and under the influence of uneven background signal. To evaluate the parameter sensitivity, we propose a novel measure based on the gradient magnitude of the F1 score. We measured the success rate of the individual methods for different types of the image data and found that the type of image degradation is an important factor. Using the F1 score and the newly proposed sensitivity measure, we found that the parameter sensitivity is not necessarily proportional to the success rate of a method. This also provided an explanation why the best performing method for synthetic data was outperformed by other methods when applied to the real microscopy images. On the basis of the results obtained, we conclude with the recommendation of the HDome method for data with relatively low variations in quality, or the Sorokin method for image sets in which the quality varies more. We also provide alternative recommendations for high-quality images, and for situations in which detailed parameter tuning might be deemed expensive.
- 650 _2
- $a algoritmy $7 D000465
- 650 _2
- $a počítačové zpracování obrazu $x metody $7 D007091
- 650 _2
- $a zobrazování trojrozměrné $x metody $7 D021621
- 650 _2
- $a konfokální mikroskopie $x metody $7 D018613
- 650 _2
- $a fluorescenční mikroskopie $x metody $7 D008856
- 650 _2
- $a senzitivita a specificita $7 D012680
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Matula, Pavel $u Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis, Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Matula, Petr $u Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis, Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Wörz, Stefan $u IPMB and BIOQUANT, Department of Bioinformatics and Functional Genomics, and DKFZ, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
- 700 1_
- $a Rohr, Karl $u IPMB and BIOQUANT, Department of Bioinformatics and Functional Genomics, and DKFZ, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
- 700 1_
- $a Kozubek, Michal $u Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis, Faculty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00013935 $t Cytometry. Part A the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology $x 1552-4930 $g Roč. 87, č. 8 (2015), s. 759-72
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26033916 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20160722 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20160725114008 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1155389 $s 945247
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2015 $b 87 $c 8 $d 759-72 $e 20150528 $i 1552-4930 $m Cytometry. Part A $n Cytometry A $x MED00013935
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20160722