Back

Foundation cell segmentation models performance on live microscopy and spatial-omics data

Miao, Y.; Surguladze, N.; Lerner, J.; Poysungnoen, K.; Ariano, K.; Li, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Van Batavia, K.; Jepson, J.; Van De Klashorst, J.; Ni, B. Y. X.; Armstrong, A.; Rahman, R.; Horstmeyer, R.; Hickey, J. W.

2026-04-21 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.04.18.719315 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Accurate cell segmentation is an essential step for quantitative analysis of biological imaging data. Recent advances in deep learning have led to the development of generalist segmentation models that perform robustly across multiple imaging modalities, including label-free phase contrast, fluorescence cell culture, and multiplexed fluorescence tissue imaging. However, systematic comparisons of these models at the level of downstream biological analysis remain limited. To address this gap, we evaluated several recent segmentation models, including Cellpose cyto3, Cellpose-SAM, {micro}SAM, and CellSAM, on phase contrast and fluorescence cell culture images. In addition, Mesmer and InstanSeg were included for benchmarking on multiplexed fluorescence tissue images generated using CO-Detection by IndEXing (CODEX). We found that Cellpose-SAM achieved strong performance on phase contrast images, while SAM-based models consistently performed well on fluorescence cell culture data. In contrast, no single model consistently outperformed others on CODEX datasets. Instead, each model exhibited distinct strengths and limitations, which led to differences in downstream analyses, including clustering and cell type identification. Together, our study emphasizes the importance of selecting segmentation models based on dataset characteristics and analytical goals, rather than relying on a single universal approach.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biological Imaging
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.2%
2
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 3%
8.5%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 28%
6.4%
4
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
5
Nature Methods
336 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.9%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.3%
7
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 36%
4.2%
8
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
9
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 34%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
10
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
11
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.5%
12
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.4%
13
Journal of Structural Biology
58 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
14
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
15
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.1%
16
Journal of Microscopy
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
17
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.9%
18
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
19
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
20
Journal of Cell Science
353 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
21
Genome Biology
555 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
22
Cytometry Part A
30 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
24
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.8%
25
Light: Science & Applications
16 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
26
BMC Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
27
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
214 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
28
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
29
Small Methods
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
Optics Express
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%