3D EM重建的验证:噪声中的幻影。

IF 1.1 Q4 BIOPHYSICS AIMS Biophysics Pub Date : 2015-01-01 DOI:10.3934/biophy.2015.1.21
J Bernard Heymann
{"title":"3D EM重建的验证:噪声中的幻影。","authors":"J Bernard Heymann","doi":"10.3934/biophy.2015.1.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Validation is a necessity to trust the structures solved by electron microscopy by single particle techniques. The impressive achievements in single particle reconstruction fuel its expansion beyond a small community of image processing experts. This poses the risk of inappropriate data processing with dubious results. Nowhere is it more clearly illustrated than in the recovery of a reference density map from pure noise aligned to that map-a phantom in the noise. Appropriate use of existing validating methods such as resolution-limited alignment and the processing of independent data sets (\"gold standard\") avoid this pitfall. However, these methods can be undermined by biases introduced in various subtle ways. How can we test that a map is a coherent structure present in the images selected from the micrographs? In stead of viewing the phantom emerging from noise as a cautionary tale, it should be used as a defining baseline. Any map is always recoverable from noise images, provided a sufficient number of images are aligned and used in reconstruction. However, with smaller numbers of images, the expected coherence in the real particle images should yield better reconstructions than equivalent numbers of noise or background images, even without masking or imposing resolution limits as potential biases. The validation test proposed is therefore a simple alignment of a limited number of micrograph and noise images against the final reconstruction as reference, demonstrating that the micrograph images yield a better reconstruction. I examine synthetic cases to relate the resolution of a reconstruction to the alignment error as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio. I also administered the test to real cases of publicly available data. Adopting such a test can aid the microscopist in assessing the usefulness of the micrographs taken before committing to lengthy processing with questionable outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":7529,"journal":{"name":"AIMS Biophysics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4440490/pdf/","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of 3D EM Reconstructions: The Phantom in the Noise.\",\"authors\":\"J Bernard Heymann\",\"doi\":\"10.3934/biophy.2015.1.21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Validation is a necessity to trust the structures solved by electron microscopy by single particle techniques. The impressive achievements in single particle reconstruction fuel its expansion beyond a small community of image processing experts. This poses the risk of inappropriate data processing with dubious results. Nowhere is it more clearly illustrated than in the recovery of a reference density map from pure noise aligned to that map-a phantom in the noise. Appropriate use of existing validating methods such as resolution-limited alignment and the processing of independent data sets (\\\"gold standard\\\") avoid this pitfall. However, these methods can be undermined by biases introduced in various subtle ways. How can we test that a map is a coherent structure present in the images selected from the micrographs? In stead of viewing the phantom emerging from noise as a cautionary tale, it should be used as a defining baseline. Any map is always recoverable from noise images, provided a sufficient number of images are aligned and used in reconstruction. However, with smaller numbers of images, the expected coherence in the real particle images should yield better reconstructions than equivalent numbers of noise or background images, even without masking or imposing resolution limits as potential biases. The validation test proposed is therefore a simple alignment of a limited number of micrograph and noise images against the final reconstruction as reference, demonstrating that the micrograph images yield a better reconstruction. I examine synthetic cases to relate the resolution of a reconstruction to the alignment error as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio. I also administered the test to real cases of publicly available data. Adopting such a test can aid the microscopist in assessing the usefulness of the micrographs taken before committing to lengthy processing with questionable outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIMS Biophysics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4440490/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIMS Biophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3934/biophy.2015.1.21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIMS Biophysics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/biophy.2015.1.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

要使单粒子技术在电子显微镜下解出的结构可信,验证是必要的。在单粒子重建方面令人印象深刻的成就推动了它的扩展,超越了图像处理专家的小社区。这就带来了不恰当的数据处理和可疑结果的风险。没有什么比从与该地图对齐的纯噪声中恢复参考密度图(噪声中的幽灵)更清楚地说明了这一点。适当使用现有的验证方法,如分辨率有限的对齐和独立数据集的处理(“黄金标准”),可以避免这个陷阱。然而,这些方法可能会被以各种微妙方式引入的偏见所破坏。我们如何测试从显微照片中选择的图像中呈现的地图是一个连贯的结构?我们不应该把从噪音中出现的幽灵看作是一个警世故事,而应该把它作为一个明确的基准。任何地图总是可以从噪声图像中恢复,只要有足够数量的图像被对齐并用于重建。然而,在图像数量较少的情况下,真实粒子图像的预期一致性应该比同等数量的噪声或背景图像产生更好的重建,即使没有掩蔽或强加分辨率限制作为潜在的偏差。因此,提出的验证测试是将有限数量的显微照片和噪声图像与最终重建作为参考进行简单对齐,证明显微照片图像产生更好的重建。我研究了合成情况,将重建的分辨率与作为信噪比的函数的对准误差联系起来。我还对公开可用数据的真实案例进行了测试。采用这样的测试可以帮助显微镜学家在进行冗长的处理和可疑的结果之前评估显微照片的有用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of 3D EM Reconstructions: The Phantom in the Noise.

Validation is a necessity to trust the structures solved by electron microscopy by single particle techniques. The impressive achievements in single particle reconstruction fuel its expansion beyond a small community of image processing experts. This poses the risk of inappropriate data processing with dubious results. Nowhere is it more clearly illustrated than in the recovery of a reference density map from pure noise aligned to that map-a phantom in the noise. Appropriate use of existing validating methods such as resolution-limited alignment and the processing of independent data sets ("gold standard") avoid this pitfall. However, these methods can be undermined by biases introduced in various subtle ways. How can we test that a map is a coherent structure present in the images selected from the micrographs? In stead of viewing the phantom emerging from noise as a cautionary tale, it should be used as a defining baseline. Any map is always recoverable from noise images, provided a sufficient number of images are aligned and used in reconstruction. However, with smaller numbers of images, the expected coherence in the real particle images should yield better reconstructions than equivalent numbers of noise or background images, even without masking or imposing resolution limits as potential biases. The validation test proposed is therefore a simple alignment of a limited number of micrograph and noise images against the final reconstruction as reference, demonstrating that the micrograph images yield a better reconstruction. I examine synthetic cases to relate the resolution of a reconstruction to the alignment error as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio. I also administered the test to real cases of publicly available data. Adopting such a test can aid the microscopist in assessing the usefulness of the micrographs taken before committing to lengthy processing with questionable outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AIMS Biophysics
AIMS Biophysics BIOPHYSICS-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: AIMS Biophysics is an international Open Access journal devoted to publishing peer-reviewed, high quality, original papers in the field of biophysics. We publish the following article types: original research articles, reviews, editorials, letters, and conference reports. AIMS Biophysics welcomes, but not limited to, the papers from the following topics: · Structural biology · Biophysical technology · Bioenergetics · Membrane biophysics · Cellular Biophysics · Electrophysiology · Neuro-Biophysics · Biomechanics · Systems biology
期刊最新文献
Endoplasmic reticulum localization of phosphoinositide specific phospholipase C enzymes in U73122 cultured human osteoblasts Identification of potential SARS-CoV-2 papain-like protease inhibitors with the ability to interact with the catalytic triad Predicting factors and top gene identification for survival data of breast cancer A review of molecular biology detection methods for human adenovirus Natural bond orbital analysis of dication magnesium complexes [Mg(H2O)6]2+ and [[Mg(H2O)6](H2O)n]2+; n=1-4
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1