Article

Quantitative Comparison of Algorithms for Tracking Single Fluorescent Particles

Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908, USA.
Biophysical Journal (Impact Factor: 3.97). 11/2001; 81(4):2378-88. DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3495(01)75884-5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Single particle tracking has seen numerous applications in biophysics, ranging from the diffusion of proteins in cell membranes to the movement of molecular motors. A plethora of computer algorithms have been developed to monitor the sub-pixel displacement of fluorescent objects between successive video frames, and some have been claimed to have "nanometer" resolution. To date, there has been no rigorous comparison of these algorithms under realistic conditions. In this paper, we quantitatively compare specific implementations of four commonly used tracking algorithms: cross-correlation, sum-absolute difference, centroid, and direct Gaussian fit. Images of fluorescent objects ranging in size from point sources to 5 microm were computer generated with known sub-pixel displacements. Realistic noise was added and the above four algorithms were compared for accuracy and precision. We found that cross-correlation is the most accurate algorithm for large particles. However, for point sources, direct Gaussian fit to the intensity distribution is the superior algorithm in terms of both accuracy and precision, and is the most robust at low signal-to-noise. Most significantly, all four algorithms fail as the signal-to-noise ratio approaches 4. We judge direct Gaussian fit to be the best algorithm when tracking single fluorophores, where the signal-to-noise is frequently near 4.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: William Guilford
  • Source
    • "Information is extracted from these image sequences by first localizing the center of the label in each frame. Several methods for localizing fluorescent particles exist with different levels of accuracy, computational complexity, and modeling assumptions (see, e.g., (Cheezum et al., 2001), (Andersson, 2008), and (Parthasarathy, 2012)). After the particle has been localized within each frame, parameters describing the motion of the particle, such as diffusion coefficients, are extracted. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A common technique for analyzing certain biophysical phenomena involves \tagging" a feature of interest with a uorescent particle and observing it over time. This technique, known as particle tracking microscopy, typically involves two steps: (1) localization of the particle in space, and (2) estimation of parameters related to a mathematical model of the particle's motion. There exist several methods that accomplish each task independently; however, there is currently no general framework that can perform both tasks simultaneously with arbitrary motion and observation models. In this work, we describe how this can be accomplished through the application of a framework recently developed by Schön, Wills, and Ninness. This framework, which uses the Expectation Maximization algorithm in conjunction with Sequential Monte Carlo methods, can simultaneously localize a particle's location while calculating maximum likelihood estimates of model parameters. Since the precision and computational complexity of this method significantly depend on the number of particles used, we also describe a potentially faster, albeit suboptimal, method based on the assumed normality of the posterior densities. We demonstrate these methods by applying them to the tracking of a nanometer-scale uorescent particle undergoing anisotropic diffusion in a plane.
    Preview · Article · Dec 2015
  • Source
    • ", y 0 ) are the fluorescence intensity and the position of the fluorescing center, respectively, σ is the radial standard deviation of the Gaussian function, and C is the background fluorescence. This analysis can be used to measure the center position of the image (Kubitscheck et al., 2000; Cheezum et al., 2001; Thompson et al., 2002; Small and Stahlheber, 2014). Though there are other common methods for determining the center, including cross-correlation, sum-absolute difference, and simple centroid, Gaussian fitting has the highest robustness at low signal-to-noise ratios, which is common in biological studies (Thompson et al., 2002). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the past decade, great developments in optical microscopy have made this technology increasingly compatible with biological studies. Fluorescence microscopy has especially contributed to investigating the dynamic behaviors of live specimens and can now resolve objects with nanometer precision and resolution due to super-resolution imaging. Additionally, single particle tracking provides information on the dynamics of individual proteins at the nanometer scale both in vitro and in cells. Complementing advances in microscopy technologies has been the development of fluorescent probes. The quantum dot, a semi-conductor fluorescent nanoparticle, is particularly suitable for single particle tracking and super-resolution imaging. This article overviews the principles of single particle tracking and super resolution along with describing their application to the nanometer measurement/observation of biological systems when combined with quantum dot technologies.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2014 · Frontiers in Physiology
  • Source
    • "Yang et al. [10] proposed an approach based on Kalman filter for tracking particle motion. However, these approaches demonstrate unsatisfactory performance with images of low SNR [11] [12] [13]. For object tracking in noisy image sequences, Smal et al. [13] presented a particle filtering based approach. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neurofilament is an important type of intercellular cargos transmitted in neural axons. Given fluorescence microscopy images, existing methods extract neurofilament movement patterns by manual tracking. In this paper, we describe two automated tracking methods for analyzing neurofilament movement based on two different techniques: constrained particle filtering and tracking-by-detection. First, we introduce the constrained particle filtering approach. In this approach, the orientation and position of a particle are constrained by the axon’s shape such that fewer particles are necessary for tracking neurofilament movement than object tracking techniques based on generic particle filtering. Secondly, a tracking-by-detection approach to neurofilament tracking is presented. For this approach, the axon is decomposed into blocks, and the blocks encompassing the moving neurofilaments are detected by graph labeling using Markov random field. Finally, we compare two tracking methods by performing tracking experiments on real time-lapse image sequences of neurofilament movement, and the experimental results show that both methods demonstrate good performance in comparison with the existing approaches, and the tracking accuracy of the tracing-by-detection approach is slightly better between the two.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2014 · Journal of Applied Mathematics
Show more