IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1009274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation and tuning of in situ transcriptomics image processing workflows with crowdsourced annotations

Author

Listed:
  • Jenny M Vo-Phamhi
  • Kevin A Yamauchi
  • Rafael Gómez-Sjöberg

Abstract

Recent advancements in in situ methods, such as multiplexed in situ RNA hybridization and in situ RNA sequencing, have deepened our understanding of the way biological processes are spatially organized in tissues. Automated image processing and spot-calling algorithms for analyzing in situ transcriptomics images have many parameters which need to be tuned for optimal detection. Having ground truth datasets (images where there is very high confidence on the accuracy of the detected spots) is essential for evaluating these algorithms and tuning their parameters. We present a first-in-kind open-source toolkit and framework for in situ transcriptomics image analysis that incorporates crowdsourced annotations, alongside expert annotations, as a source of ground truth for the analysis of in situ transcriptomics images. The kit includes tools for preparing images for crowdsourcing annotation to optimize crowdsourced workers’ ability to annotate these images reliably, performing quality control (QC) on worker annotations, extracting candidate parameters for spot-calling algorithms from sample images, tuning parameters for spot-calling algorithms, and evaluating spot-calling algorithms and worker performance. These tools are wrapped in a modular pipeline with a flexible structure that allows users to take advantage of crowdsourced annotations from any source of their choice. We tested the pipeline using real and synthetic in situ transcriptomics images and annotations from the Amazon Mechanical Turk system obtained via Quanti.us. Using real images from in situ experiments and simulated images produced by one of the tools in the kit, we studied worker sensitivity to spot characteristics and established rules for annotation QC. We explored and demonstrated the use of ground truth generated in this way for validating spot-calling algorithms and tuning their parameters, and confirmed that consensus crowdsourced annotations are a viable substitute for expert-generated ground truth for these purposes.Author summary: To understand important biological processes such as development, wound healing, and disease, it is necessary to study where different genes are expressed in a tissue. RNA molecules can be visualized within tissues by using in situ transcriptomics tools, which use fluorescent probes that bind to specific RNA target molecules and appear in microscopy images as bright spots. Algorithms can be used to find the locations of these spots, but ground truth datasets (images with spots located to high accuracy) are needed to evaluate these algorithms and tune their parameters. While the typical way of generating ground truth datasets is having an expert annotate the spots by hand, many in situ transcriptomics image datasets are too large for this. However, it is often easy for non-experts to identify the spots with minimal training.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenny M Vo-Phamhi & Kevin A Yamauchi & Rafael Gómez-Sjöberg, 2021. "Validation and tuning of in situ transcriptomics image processing workflows with crowdsourced annotations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-22, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1009274
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009274
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009274&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009274?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1009274. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.