4.7 Review

Advances and opportunities in image analysis of bacterial cells and communities

期刊

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY REVIEWS
卷 45, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/femsre/fuaa062

关键词

biofilm; microbial community; single cell; segmentation; phenotyping; machine learning; data science

资金

  1. European Research Council [StG-716 734]
  2. Max Planck Society
  3. Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes
  4. Joachim Herz Stiftung

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the importance of cellular morphology and sub-cellular spatial structure on microbial cell function, as well as the development of computational image analysis techniques. By utilizing automated image processing, quantification of properties of single cells and microbial communities can be achieved, opening up new opportunities for quantitative studies in microbiology.
The cellular morphology and sub-cellular spatial structure critically influence the function of microbial cells. Similarly, the spatial arrangement of genotypes and phenotypes in microbial communities has important consequences for cooperation, competition, and community functions. Fluorescence microscopy techniques are widely used to measure spatial structure inside living cells and communities, which often results in large numbers of images that are difficult or impossible to analyze manually. The rapidly evolving progress in computational image analysis has recently enabled the quantification of a large number of properties of single cells and communities, based on traditional analysis techniques and convolutional neural networks. Here, we provide a brief introduction to core concepts of automated image processing, recent software tools and how to validate image analysis results. We also discuss recent advances in image analysis of microbial cells and communities, and how these advances open up opportunities for quantitative studies of spatiotemporal processes in microbiology, based on image cytometry and adaptive microscope control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据