Back

High-Resolution Time-Lapse Imaging of Droplet-Cell Dynamics via Optimal Transport and Contrastive Learning

Schlotheuber, L. J.; Vollenweider, M.; Gutjahr, S.; Hungerland, T.; Danis, R.; Ormaniec, W.; Linder, A.; Boeva, V.; Lüchtefeld, I.; Eyer, K.

2025-03-10 bioinformatics
10.1101/2025.03.06.641128 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Single-cell analysis is essential for uncovering heterogeneous biological functions that arise from intricate cellular interaction. Microfluidic droplet arrays enable precise dynamic data collection through cell encapsulation in picoliter volumes. The time-lapse imaging of these arrays can reveal functional kinetics and cellular fates, but accurate tracking of cell identities across time frames remains challenging when droplets move significantly. Specifically, existing machine learning methods often depend on labeled data or require neighboring cells as reference; without them, these methods struggle to track identical objects across long distances with complex movements. To address these limitations, we developed a pipeline combining visual object detection, feature extraction via contrastive learning, and optimal transport-based object matching, which minimizes reliance on labeled training data. Our approach was validated across various experimental conditions and was able to track thousands of water-in-oil microfluidic droplets over large distances and long (> 30 min) time-separated frames. We achieved high precision in previously untraceable scenarios, tracking small, medium and large movements (corresponding to ~126, ~800 and ~10,000 {micro}m, respectively) with a success rate of correctly tracked droplets of > 90% for average movements within 212 object diameters, and > 60% for average movements of > 100 object diameters. This workflow lays the foundation for high-resolution, dynamic analysis of droplets and cells in both spatial and temporal dimensions without relying on visual labeling, allowing high-accuracy tracking in samples, where the uniqueness of the sample makes repeating experiments infeasible.

Matching journals

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

1
Small Methods
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.6%
2
Lab on a Chip
88 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.1%
3
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 2%
8.4%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
5
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.9%
6
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.1%
8
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.6%
9
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.1%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 50%
2.1%
11
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.8%
12
Small
70 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
13
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
15
Nano Letters
63 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
ACS Nano
99 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
Nature Methods
336 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
18
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 47%
1.3%
19
Communications Chemistry
39 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
20
Nature Biotechnology
147 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
21
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.9%
22
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.9%
23
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 44%
0.7%
24
Nature Chemical Biology
104 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
26
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%