Skip to main content
Fig. 5 | BMC Bioinformatics

Fig. 5

From: NODeJ: an ImageJ plugin for 3D segmentation of nuclear objects

Fig. 5

Comparison of chromocenters and FISH signals obtained with NucleusJ2.0 and NODeJ. The results were obtained from wild type nuclei from Poulet et al. [8] and Dubos et al. [9]. We used the published results [8, 9] for the NucleusJ2.0 results (Hoechst n = 253) and reanalyzed the global set of wild type nuclei available for NODeJ results (Hoechst n = 719) (Additional file 1). A–C comparison of Hoechst staining analysis. A. Z-projection of nuclei (Hoechst staining), and NucleusJ2.0 and NODeJ segmentation results (scale bar 2 μm3). The denstity plots show the repartition of the number of chromocenters per nucleus (B) and the mean chromocenter volume per nucleus (C). DF comparison of FISH analysis. D. Z-projection of nuclei (180bp repeats FISH) and segmentation results from NucleusJ2.0 and NODeJ (scale bar 2 μm3, each color is an individual object). Red arrows indicate the same region identified as two objects by NucleusJ2.0 and one object by NODeJ. The denstity plots show the repartition of the number of FISH signals per nucleus (n = 68 for NODeJ and NucleusJ2.0 results) (E), the mean FISH signals volume per nucleus (F). Density plots were made using various R packages [17, 18] (Additional files 2 and 3 describe the computed parameters)

Back to article page