An Automated Strategy for Unbiased Morphometric Analyses and Classifications of Growth Cones In Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During neural circuit development, attractive or repulsive guidance cue molecules direct growth cones (GCs) to their targets by eliciting cytoskeletal remodeling, which is reflected in their morphology. The experimental power of in vitro neuronal cultures to assay this process and its molecular mechanisms is well established, however, a method to rapidly find and quantify multiple morphological aspects of GCs is lacking. To this end, we have developed a free, easy to use, and fully automated Fiji macro, Conographer, which accurately identifies and measures many morphological parameters of GCs in 2D explant culture images. These measurements are then subjected to principle component analysis and k-means clustering to mathematically classify the GCs as "collapsed" or "extended". The morphological parameters measured for each GC are found to be significantly different between collapsed and extended GCs, and are sufficient to classify GCs as such with the same level of accuracy as human observers. Application of a known collapse-inducing ligand results in significant changes in all parameters, resulting in an increase in 'collapsed' GCs determined by k-means clustering, as expected. Our strategy provides a powerful tool for exploring the relationship between GC morphology and guidance cue signaling, which in particular will greatly facilitate high-throughput studies of the effects of drugs, gene silencing or overexpression, or any other experimental manipulation in the context of an in vitro axon guidance assay.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".