MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382931746 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0282990

Automated identification and tracking of cells in Cytometry of Reaction Rate Constant (CRRC)

2023· article· en· W4382931746 on OpenAlexafffund
Giammarco Nebbioso, Robel Yosief, Vasilij Koshkin, Yumin Qiu, Chun Peng, Vadim Elisseev, Sergey N. Krylov

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFluorescence microscopeFluorescenceMicroscopyBiological systemPopulationVideo microscopyArtificial intelligenceWorkflowFluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopyCytometryComputer visionComputer scienceCellChemistryBiologyPhysicsOpticsCell biologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cytometry of Reaction Rate Constant (CRRC) is a method for studying cell-population heterogeneity using time-lapse fluorescence microscopy, which allows one to follow reaction kinetics in individual cells. The current and only CRRC workflow utilizes a single fluorescence image to manually identify cell contours which are then used to determine fluorescence intensity of individual cells in the entire time-stack of images. This workflow is only reliable if cells maintain their positions during the time-lapse measurements. If the cells move, the original cell contours become unsuitable for evaluating intracellular fluorescence and the CRRC experiment will be inaccurate. The requirement of invariant cell positions during a prolonged imaging is impossible to satisfy for motile cells. Here we report a CRRC workflow developed to be applicable to motile cells. The new workflow combines fluorescence microscopy with transmitted-light microscopy and utilizes a new automated tool for cell identification and tracking. A transmitted-light image is taken right before every fluorescence image to determine cell contours, and cell contours are tracked through the time-stack of transmitted-light images to account for cell movement. Each unique contour is used to determine fluorescence intensity of cells in the associated fluorescence image. Next, time dependencies of the intracellular fluorescence intensities are used to determine each cell's rate constant and construct a kinetic histogram "number of cells vs rate constant." The new workflow's robustness to cell movement was confirmed experimentally by conducting a CRRC study of cross-membrane transport in motile cells. The new workflow makes CRRC applicable to a wide range of cell types and eliminates the influence of cell motility on the accuracy of results. Additionally, the workflow could potentially monitor kinetics of varying biological processes at the single-cell level for sizable cell populations. Although our workflow was designed ad hoc for CRRC, this cell-segmentation/cell-tracking strategy also represents an entry-level, user-friendly option for a variety of biological assays (i.e., migration, proliferation assays, etc.). Importantly, no prior knowledge of informatics (i.e., training a model for deep learning) is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207