↓ Skip to main content

Critical evaluation of quantitative colocalization analysis in confocal fluorescence microscopy

Overview of attention for article published in Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Critical evaluation of quantitative colocalization analysis in confocal fluorescence microscopy
Published in
Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s12539-012-0117-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yong Wu, Vadim Zinchuk, Olga Grossenbacher-Zinchuk, Enrico Stefani

Abstract

Spatial colocalization of fluorescently labeled proteins can reveal valuable information about proteinprotein interactions. Compared to qualitative visual interpretation of dual color images, quantitative colocalization analysis (QCA) provides more objective evaluations to the degree of colocalization. However, the finite resolution power of microscopes and the spatial patterns of intracellular structures may compromise the reliability of many classical QCA methods. In this paper, we discuss the strength and weakness of some mostly used QCA methods. By studying their applications on computer-simulated images and biological images, we show that classical pixel intensity based QCA methods are often vulnerable to coincidental overlapping among resolution elements (resel) distributions and thus not suitable to images with high molecular density or with low resolution. Also, many QCA methods can mistakenly regard long range correlation as colocalization due to protein localization in intracellular structures. The newly developed protein-protein index (PPI) approach is able to reduce the influence from resel overlapping and spatial intracellular pattern compared to previous methods, significantly improving the reliability of QCA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 2 4%
Portugal 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
Unknown 52 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 27%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2012.
All research outputs
#13,663,331
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences
#76
of 294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,033
of 156,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Interdisciplinary Sciences: Computational Life Sciences
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 294 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 156,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.