| Literature DB >> 30463571 |
Vineetha Menon1, Shantia Yarahmadian2, Vahid Rezania3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent research has found that abnormal functioning of Microtubules (MTs) could be linked to fatal diseases such as Alzheimer's. Hence, there is an imminent need to understand the implications of MTs for disease- diagnosis. However, studies of cellular processes like MTs are often constrained by physical limitations of their data acquisition systems such as optical microscopes and are vulnerable to either destruction of the specimen or the probe. In addition, study of MTs is challenged with non-uniform sampling of the MT dynamic instability phenomenon relative to its time-lapse observation of the cellular processes. Thus, the above caveats limit the overall period of time that the MT data can be collected, thereby causing limited data availability scenario.Entities:
Keywords: Expectation Maximization; Kalman filtering; Missing data; Mutual information; Principal component analysis; Superresolution; Wavelets
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30463571 PMCID: PMC6249719 DOI: 10.1186/s12918-018-0631-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Syst Biol ISSN: 1752-0509
Fig. 1Schematic representation of proposed superresolution framework for MT signal prediction
Fig. 2Non-uniform sampling of MT Signal
Fig. 3Comparison of EM based ML-Kalman (MLK) predicted MT signals with other methods. a MLK-predicted signal d=1 b MLK-predicted signal d=2 c MLK-predicted signal d=3 d MLK-predicted signal d+1=4
Fig. 4Comparison of our proposed superresolution methods for MT signals with other methods
Comparison of SNR and RMSE for all methods
| MT Parameters | MLK-R | MLK-MI | NL-I | CS-0.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 12.71 | 12.09 | 4.78 | |
|
|
| 0.44 | 0.49 | 1.10 |
Significance as referred in main text is that the bold text represents highest / best performance values
Fig. 5Wavelet domain peak detection of the MLK-predicted MT signal
Comparison of the original and estimated transition frequency MT parameters for all methods
| MT Parameters | OrigMT | MLK-R | MLK-MI | NL-I | CS-0.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5.47 | 9.53 | 12.04 |
|
|
| 0 | 0 |
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 | 0.22 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 11.59 | 7.88 | 5.48 |
Significance as referred in main text is that the bold text represents highest / best performance values
Comparison of the original and estimated velocity and length MT parameters for all methods
| MT Parameters | OrigMT | MLK-R | MLK-MI | NL-I | CS-0.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 42.16 | 72.27 | 63.24 |
|
|
|
| 40.11 | 36.14 | 21.68 |
|
|
| 5.31 |
| 7.87 | 5.44 |
Significance as referred in main text is that the bold text represents highest / best performance values
Comparison of the estimated MT error parameters for all methods
| MT Parameters | MLK-R | MLK-MI | NL-I | CS-0.3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0 | 0.22 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||
|
| -0.22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||
|
| 0 | -3.28 | -0.77 | -3.28 |
|
| ||||
|
| 0.11 | 0.11 | 0 | 0.11 |
|
| ||||
|
| 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 |
|
| ||||
|
| 0 | 3.05 | 0.66 | 3.07 |
|
| ||||
|
| -2.00 | -3.00 | -4.00 | -3.00 |
|
| ||||
|
| 2.66 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 |
|
|