Back

Machine Learning Classification of 53BP1 Foci

Benitez-Jones, M. X.; Keegan, S.; Jamshahi, S.; Fenyo, D.

2024-03-02 bioinformatics
10.1101/2024.02.28.582150 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Background53BP1 foci are reflective of DNA double-strand break formation and have been used as radiation markers. Manual focus counting, while prone to bias and time constraints, remains the most accurate mode of detecting 53BP1 foci. Several studies have pursued automated focus detection to replace manual methods. Deep learning, spatial 3D images, and segmentation techniques are main components of the highest performing automated methods. While these approaches have achieved promising results regarding accurate focus detection and cell classification, they are not compatible with time-sensitive large-scale applications due to their demand for long run times, advanced microscopy, and computational resources. Further, segmentation of overlapping foci in 2D images has the potential to represent focus morphologies inaccurately. ResultsTo overcome these limitations, we developed a novel method to classify 2D fluorescence microscopy images of 53BP1 foci. Our approach consisted of three key features: (1) general 53BP1 focus classes, (2) varied parameter space composed of properties from individual foci and their respective Fourier transform, and (3) widely-available machine learning classifiers. We identified four main focus classes, which consisted of blurred foci and three levels of overlapping foci. Our parameter space for the training focus library, composed of foci formed by fluorescently-tagged BP1-2, showed a wide correlation range between variables which was validated using a publicly-available library of immunostained 53BP1 foci. Random forest achieved one of the highest and most stable performances for binary and multiclass problems, followed by a support vector machine and k-nearest neighbors. Specific metrics impacted the classification of blurred and low overlap foci for both train and test sets. ConclusionsOur method classified 53BP1 foci across separate fluorescent markers, resolutions, and damage-inducing methods, using off-the-shelf machine learning classifiers, a diverse parameter space, and well-defined focus classes.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 3%
10.2%
2
Biological Imaging
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.5%
4
Journal of Microscopy
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 13%
6.9%
6
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.2%
8
BMC Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
10
Journal of Biophotonics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
11
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.8%
12
Physics in Medicine & Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
13
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.3%
14
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
214 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
16
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
17
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
18
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
19
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
20
Plant Methods
39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
21
Methods
29 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
22
Journal of Structural Biology
58 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
24
Optics Express
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
25
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.5%