↓ Skip to main content

Limits of Applicability of the Voronoi Tessellation Determined by Centers of Cell Nuclei to Epithelium Morphology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Limits of Applicability of the Voronoi Tessellation Determined by Centers of Cell Nuclei to Epithelium Morphology
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00551
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Kaliman, Christina Jayachandran, Florian Rehfeldt, Ana-Sunčana Smith

Abstract

It is well accepted that cells in the tissue can be regarded as tiles tessellating space. A number of approaches were developed to find an appropriate mathematical description of such cell tiling. A particularly useful approach is the so called Voronoi tessellation, built from centers of mass of the cell nuclei (CMVT), which is commonly used for estimating the morphology of cells in epithelial tissues. However, a study providing a statistically sound analysis of this method's accuracy is not available in the literature. We addressed this issue here by comparing a number of morphological measures of the cells, including area, perimeter, and elongation obtained from such a tessellation with identical measures extracted from direct imaging acquired by staining the cell membranes. After analyzing the shapes of 15,000 MDCK II epithelial cells under several conditions, we find that CMVT reasonably well reproduces many of the morphological properties of the tissue with an error that is between 10 and 15%. Moreover, cross-correlations between different morphological measures are reproduced qualitatively correctly by this method. However, all of the properties including the cell perimeters, number of neighbors, and anisotropy measures often suffer from systematic or size dependent errors. These discrepancies originate from the polygonal nature of the tessellation which sets the limits of the applicability of CMVT.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 25%
Researcher 8 12%
Unspecified 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 13 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Unspecified 7 11%
Engineering 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 17 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,435,289
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,655
of 13,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,473
of 415,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#77
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 415,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.