↓ Skip to main content

Segmentation and classification of two-channel C. elegans nucleus-labeled fluorescence images

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Segmentation and classification of two-channel C. elegans nucleus-labeled fluorescence images
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1817-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mengdi Zhao, Jie An, Haiwen Li, Jiazhi Zhang, Shang-Tong Li, Xue-Mei Li, Meng-Qiu Dong, Heng Mao, Louis Tao

Abstract

Aging is characterized by a gradual breakdown of cellular structures. Nuclear abnormality is a hallmark of progeria in human. Analysis of age-dependent nuclear morphological changes in Caenorhabditis elegans is of great value to aging research, and this calls for an automatic image processing method that is suitable for both normal and abnormal structures. Our image processing method consists of nuclear segmentation, feature extraction and classification. First, taking up the challenges of defining individual nuclei with fuzzy boundaries or in a clump, we developed an accurate nuclear segmentation method using fused two-channel images with seed-based cluster splitting and k-means algorithm, and achieved a high precision against the manual segmentation results. Next, we extracted three groups of nuclear features, among which five features were selected by minimum Redundancy Maximum Relevance (mRMR) for classifiers. After comparing the classification performances of several popular techniques, we identified that Random Forest, which achieved a mean class accuracy (MCA) of 98.69%, was the best classifier for our data set. Lastly, we demonstrated the method with two quantitative analyses of C. elegans nuclei, which led to the discovery of two possible longevity indicators. We produced an automatic image processing method for two-channel C. elegans nucleus-labeled fluorescence images. It frees biologists from segmenting and classifying the nuclei manually.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Professor 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 27%
Chemical Engineering 2 9%
Computer Science 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 7 32%
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 10 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,081,725
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,496
of 7,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,226
of 316,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#54
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.