Automatic detection and localization of sister chromatid exchanges.

Zack, G W; Spriet, J.A.; Latt, Samuel A.; Granlund, Gösta H.; Young, Ian T.

doi:10.1177/24.1.1254915

Cited by 17 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The feasibility of automatic scoring of SCEs has been demonstrated by several authors [Zack et al, 1976[Zack et al, , 1977Shafer et al, 1980;He and Chai, 1990], but not so far in the context of a complete system applied to routinely prepared samples. Except that Zack et aJ.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic scoring of sister chromatid exchanges by image analysis in a dose response experiment

García-Sagredo

Piper

Rutovitz

et al. 1994

Environ and Mol Mutagen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A system which automatically selects second division metaphases and then, automatically scores the number of seEs of each cell is described. In on initial set of experiments, the performance of the components of the system was measured using a doto set in which metophases had been visually classified as either 2nd division or other; and in 2nd division metaphoses, every SeE had been marked on a hard copy.seE scoring had a true positive rate of about 75% and a false positive rate of about 1.5 false SeEs per metaphase analyzed. Second division detection hod a true positive rate of 80% and a false positive rate of about 10% of the non-2nd division cells. Next, the overall system was compared to human visual scoring in a dose-response experiment by analyzing the effect of mitomycin C on human chromosomes scored visually by two observers and by the fully automatic scoring. Human visual scoring and machine analysis showed similar dose responses, but the variability between them was considerable.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic scoring of sister chromatid exchanges by image analysis in a dose response experiment

García-Sagredo

Piper

Rutovitz

et al. 1994

Environ and Mol Mutagen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A shading correction is then applied using (again) a gray-level opening. The resulting image is segmented by an automatically-chosen constant threshold u zack (23). We used this technique because it is suitable for images that contain only a few objects and have a large background area.…”

Section: Finding the Region Of Interest (Roi)mentioning

confidence: 99%

FISH and chips: Automation of fluorescent dot counting in interphase cell nuclei

Netten¹,

Young²,

Vliet³

et al. 1997

Cytometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluorescence in situ hybridization allows the enumeration of chromosomal abnormalities in interphase cell nuclei. This process is called dot counting. To estimate the distribution of chromosomes per cell, a large number of cells have to be analyzed, especially when the frequency of aberrant cells is low. Automation of dot counting is required because manual counting is tedious, fatiguing, and time-consuming. We developed a completely automated fluorescence microscope system that can examine 500 cells in approximately 15 min to determine the number of labeled chromosomes (seen as dots) in each cell nucleus. This system works with two fluorescent dyes, one for the DNA hybridization dots and one for the cell nucleus. After the stage has moved to a new field, the image is automatically focused, acquired by a Photometrics KAF 1400 camera (Photometrics Ltd., Tuscon, AZ, USA), and then analyzed on a Macintosh Quadra 840AV (Apple Computer, Inc., Cupertino, CA, USA) computer. After the required number of cells has been analyzed, the user may interact to correct the computer by working with a gallery of the cell images. The automated dot counter has been tested on a number of normal specimens where 4,'6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) was used for the nucleus counterstain and a centromeric 8 probe was used to mark the desired chromosome. The slides contained lymphocytes from cultured blood. We compared the results of the dot counter with manual counting. Manually obtained results, published in the literature, were used as the "ground truth." For a normal specimen, 97.5% of cells will have two dots. Fully automated scanning of 13 slides showed that an average of 89% of all nuclei were counted correctly. In other words, an average of 11% has to be interactively corrected, using a monitor display. The machine accuracies, after interactive correction, are comparable to panels of human experts (manual). The fully automatically obtained results are biased with respect to manual counting. An error analysis is given, and different causes are discussed.

show abstract

“…Centromere location (6,27,38) 5. Chromosome aberrations (20,21,22,43) 6. Accurate DNA measurements from digital im-7.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The athena semi‐automated karyotyping system

1990

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we describe Athena, a system that provides for semi‐automated karyotyping of metaphase spreads. The system is based upon the Macintosh II computer. It uses software that is written entirely in C and consists of approximately 200 Kbytes of executable code. Athena provides automated segmentation of metaphase images into individual chromosomes, automated measurements on each banded chromosome, and automated classification into the standard Paris‐convention karyotype. Furthermore, the system provides the ability to construct one or more chromosome data bases to represent the types of metaphase spreads and staining techniques that may be used in a given laboratory. Because we believe that it is impossible to construct a system that can achieve perfect segmentation, perfect separation of touching and overlapping chromosomes, perfect localization of the centromeres, and perfect classification, the system offers the possibility for interaction at each of the above stages using the well‐accepted Macintosh user interface.

show abstract

Automatic detection and localization of sister chromatid exchanges.

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

Automatic scoring of sister chromatid exchanges by image analysis in a dose response experiment

Automatic scoring of sister chromatid exchanges by image analysis in a dose response experiment

FISH and chips: Automation of fluorescent dot counting in interphase cell nuclei

The athena semi‐automated karyotyping system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About