AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Other Versions of this Article:
AEM.00023-07v1
73/15/4922    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Merod, R. T.
Right arrow Articles by Wuertz, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Merod, R. T.
Right arrow Articles by Wuertz, S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Merod, R. T.
Right arrow Articles by Wuertz, S.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, August 2007, p. 4922-4930, Vol. 73, No. 15
0099-2240/07/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.00023-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Toward Automated Analysis of Biofilm Architecture: Bias Caused by Extraneous Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy Images{triangledown}

Robin T. Merod, Jennifer E. Warren, Hope McCaslin, and Stefan Wuertz*

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, California 95616

Received 5 January 2007/ Accepted 21 May 2007

An increasing number of studies utilize confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) for in situ visualization of biofilms and rely on the use of image analysis programs to extract quantitative descriptors of architecture. Recently, designed programs have begun incorporating procedures to automatically determine threshold values for three-dimensional CLSM image stacks. We have found that the automated threshold calculation is biased when a stack contains images lacking pixels of biological significance. Consequently, we have created the novel program Auto PHLIP-ML to resolve this bias by iteratively excluding extraneous images based on their area coverage of biomass. A procedure was developed to identify the optimal percent area coverage value used for extraneous image removal (PACVEIR). The optimal PACVEIR was defined to occur when the standard deviation of mean thickness, determined from replicate image stacks, was at a maximum, because it more accurately reflected inherent structural variation. Ten monoculture biofilms of either Ralstonia eutropha JMP228n::gfp or Acinetobacter sp. strain BD413 were tested to verify the routine. All biofilms exhibited an optimal PACVEIR between 0 and 1%. Prior to the exclusion of extraneous images, JMP228n::gfp appeared to develop more homogeneous biofilms than BD413. However, after the removal of extraneous images, JMP228n::gfp biofilms were found to form more heterogeneous biofilms. Similarly, JMP228n::gfp biofilms grown on glass surfaces vis-à-vis polyethylene membranes produced significantly different architectures after extraneous images had been removed but not when such images were included in threshold calculations. This study shows that the failure to remove extraneous images skewed a seemingly objective analysis of biofilm architecture and significantly altered statistically derived conclusions.


* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616. Phone: (530) 754-6407. Fax: (530) 752-7872. E-mail: swuertz{at}ucdavis.edu

{triangledown} Published ahead of print on 1 June, 2007.


Applied and Environmental Microbiology, August 2007, p. 4922-4930, Vol. 73, No. 15
0099-2240/07/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AEM.00023-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 2007 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.