Maryana Alegro1, Panagiotis Theofilas2, Austin Nguy3, Patricia A Castruita4, William Seeley5, Helmut Heinsen6, Daniela M Ushizima7, Lea T Grinberg8. 1. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: maryana.alegro@ucsf.edu. 2. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: panos.theofilas@ucsf.edu. 3. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: austin.nguy@ucsf.edu. 4. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: alejandra.castcap@gmail.com. 5. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: bill.seeley@ucsf.edu. 6. Medical School of the University of São Paulo, Av. Reboucas 381, São Paulo, SP 05401-000, Brazil. Electronic address: heinsen@mail.uni-wuerzburg.de. 7. Computational Research Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Rd, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA; Berkeley Institute for Data Science, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. Electronic address: dushizima@lbl.gov. 8. Memory and Aging Center, University of California San Francisco, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA. Electronic address: lea.grinberg@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immunofluorescence (IF) plays a major role in quantifying protein expression in situ and understanding cell function. It is widely applied in assessing disease mechanisms and in drug discovery research. Automation of IF analysis can transform studies using experimental cell models. However, IF analysis of postmortem human tissue relies mostly on manual interaction, often subjected to low-throughput and prone to error, leading to low inter and intra-observer reproducibility. Human postmortem brain samples challenges neuroscientists because of the high level of autofluorescence caused by accumulation of lipofuscin pigment during aging, hindering systematic analyses. We propose a method for automating cell counting and classification in IF microscopy of human postmortem brains. Our algorithm speeds up the quantification task while improving reproducibility. NEW METHOD: Dictionary learning and sparse coding allow for constructing improved cell representations using IF images. These models are input for detection and segmentation methods. Classification occurs by means of color distances between cells and a learned set. RESULTS: Our method successfully detected and classified cells in 49 human brain images. We evaluated our results regarding true positive, false positive, false negative, precision, recall, false positive rate and F1 score metrics. We also measured user-experience and time saved compared to manual countings. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: We compared our results to four open-access IF-based cell-counting tools available in the literature. Our method showed improved accuracy for all data samples. CONCLUSION: The proposed method satisfactorily detects and classifies cells from human postmortem brain IF images, with potential to be generalized for applications in other counting tasks.
BACKGROUND: Immunofluorescence (IF) plays a major role in quantifying protein expression in situ and understanding cell function. It is widely applied in assessing disease mechanisms and in drug discovery research. Automation of IF analysis can transform studies using experimental cell models. However, IF analysis of postmortem human tissue relies mostly on manual interaction, often subjected to low-throughput and prone to error, leading to low inter and intra-observer reproducibility. Human postmortem brain samples challenges neuroscientists because of the high level of autofluorescence caused by accumulation of lipofuscin pigment during aging, hindering systematic analyses. We propose a method for automating cell counting and classification in IF microscopy of human postmortem brains. Our algorithm speeds up the quantification task while improving reproducibility. NEW METHOD: Dictionary learning and sparse coding allow for constructing improved cell representations using IF images. These models are input for detection and segmentation methods. Classification occurs by means of color distances between cells and a learned set. RESULTS: Our method successfully detected and classified cells in 49 human brain images. We evaluated our results regarding true positive, false positive, false negative, precision, recall, false positive rate and F1 score metrics. We also measured user-experience and time saved compared to manual countings. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: We compared our results to four open-access IF-based cell-counting tools available in the literature. Our method showed improved accuracy for all data samples. CONCLUSION: The proposed method satisfactorily detects and classifies cells from human postmortem brain IF images, with potential to be generalized for applications in other counting tasks.
Authors: Lea Tenenholz Grinberg; Renata Eloah de Lucena Ferretti; José Marcelo Farfel; Renata Leite; Carlos Augusto Pasqualucci; Sérgio Rosemberg; Ricardo Nitrini; Paulo Hilário Nascimento Saldiva; Wilson Jacob Filho Journal: Cell Tissue Bank Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 1.522
Authors: Gowri Srinivasa; Matthew C Fickus; Yusong Guo; Adam D Linstedt; Jelena Kovacević Journal: IEEE Trans Image Process Date: 2009-04-17 Impact factor: 10.856
Authors: Anne E Carpenter; Thouis R Jones; Michael R Lamprecht; Colin Clarke; In Han Kang; Ola Friman; David A Guertin; Joo Han Chang; Robert A Lindquist; Jason Moffat; Polina Golland; David M Sabatini Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2006-10-31 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Drew Friedmann; Albert Pun; Eliza L Adams; Jan H Lui; Justus M Kebschull; Sophie M Grutzner; Caitlin Castagnola; Marc Tessier-Lavigne; Liqun Luo Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Bing-Xing Huo; Natalie Zeater; Meng Kuan Lin; Yeonsook S Takahashi; Mitsutoshi Hanada; Jaimi Nagashima; Brian C Lee; Junichi Hata; Afsah Zaheer; Ulrike Grünert; Michael I Miller; Marcello G P Rosa; Hideyuki Okano; Paul R Martin; Partha P Mitra Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: Kristen R Maynard; Madhavi Tippani; Yoichiro Takahashi; BaDoi N Phan; Thomas M Hyde; Andrew E Jaffe; Keri Martinowich Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Juan C Sanchez-Arias; Micaël Carrier; Simona D Frederiksen; Olga Shevtsova; Chloe McKee; Emma van der Slagt; Elisa Gonçalves de Andrade; Hai Lam Nguyen; Penelope A Young; Marie-Ève Tremblay; Leigh Anne Swayne Journal: Front Neuroanat Date: 2021-12-06 Impact factor: 3.856