Cloud Hosting

North, A. J. Seeing is believing? A beginners guide to practical pitfalls in image acquisition. J. Cell Biol. 172, 918 (2006).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Brown, C. M. Fluorescence microscopyavoiding the pitfalls. J. Cell Sci. 120, 17031705 (2007).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Senft, R. A. et al. A biologists guide to planning and performing quantitative bioimaging experiments. PLOS Biol. 21, e3002167 (2023).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Jonkman, J. Rigor and reproducibility in confocal fluorescence microscopy. Cytometry A J. Int. Soc. Anal. Cytol. 97, 113115 (2020).

Article Google Scholar

Heddleston, J. M., Aaron, J. S., Khuon, S. & Chew, T.-L. A guide to accurate reporting in digital image acquisitioncan anyone replicate your microscopy data? J. Cell Sci. 134, jcs254144 (2021). This paper provides a nicely detailed breakdown of why complete reporting of methods in microscopy is important, who the stakeholders are and where the changes and motivation need to come from.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Montero Llopis, P. et al. Best practices and tools for reporting reproducible fluorescence microscopy methods. Nat. Methods 18, 14631476 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Hammer, M. et al. Towards community-driven metadata standards for light microscopy: tiered specifications extending the OME model. Nat. Methods 18, 14271440 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Rigano, A. et al. Micro-Meta App: an interactive tool for collecting microscopy metadata based on community specifications. Nat. Methods 18, 14891495 (2021). The Micro-Meta App demonstrates some of the steps being taken to provide real tools for scientists to use to improve microscopy methods reporting. It is not enough to simply scold scientists that something must change; rather, it is important that the tools to make such change as quick and painless as possible be created and made freely available.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Laissue, P. P., Alghamdi, R. A., Tomancak, P., Reynaud, E. G. & Shroff, H. Assessing phototoxicity in live fluorescence imaging. Nat. Methods 14, 657661 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kiepas, A., Voorand, E., Mubaid, F., Siegel, P. M. & Brown, C. M. Optimizing live-cell fluorescence imaging conditions to minimize phototoxicity. J. Cell Sci. 133, jcs242834 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Sheen, M. R. et al. Replication study: biomechanical remodeling of the microenvironment by stromal caveolin-1 favors tumor invasion and metastasis. eLife 8, e45120 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Jambor, H. et al. Creating clear and informative image-based figures for scientific publications. PLoS Biol. 19, e3001161 (2021). This study examined how effectively images conveyed insights in high-impact biology publications. It specifically focused on identifying the frequency of unclear images that lack crucial information such as scale bars, annotation legends or accessible colors and served as the catalyst for the current research project.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676682 (2012).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Stirling, D. R. et al. CellProfiler 4: improvements in speed, utility and usability. BMC Bioinformatics 22, 433 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Dietz, C. et al. Integration of the ImageJ ecosystem in the KNIME Analytics Platform. Front. Comput. Sci. 2, 8 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Perkel, J. M. Python power-up: new image tool visualizes complex data. Nature 600, 347348 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Eliceiri, K. W. et al. Biological imaging software tools. Nat. Methods 9, 697710 (2012).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Haase, R. et al. A hitchhikers guide through the bio-image analysis software universe. FEBS Lett. 596, 24722485 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Aaron, J. & Chew, T.-L. A guide to accurate reporting in digital image processingcan anyone reproduce your quantitative analysis? J. Cell Sci. 134, jcs254151 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Miura, K. & Tosi, S. in Standard and SuperResolution Bioimaging Data Analysis: a Primer (eds. Wheeler, A. & Henriques, R.) 269284 (Wiley, 2017).

Ellenberg, J. et al. A call for public archives for biological image data. Nat. Methods 15, 849854 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Hartley, M. et al. The BioImage Archivebuilding a home for life-sciences microscopy data. J. Mol. Biol. 434, 167505 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Williams, E. et al. The Image Data Resource: a bioimage data integration and publication platform. Nat. Methods 14, 775781 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Ouyang, W. et al. BioImage Model Zoo: a community-driven resource for accessible deep learning in bioimage analysis. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.07.495102 (2022).

Boehm, U. et al. QUAREP-LiMi: a community endeavor to advance quality assessment and reproducibility in light microscopy. Nat. Methods 18, 14231426 (2021). This paper describes the network QUAREP-LiMi, in which this publications authors are embedded, and how their work is interconnected to the other QUAREP-LiMi working groups with related topics.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Nelson, G. et al. QUAREP-LiMi: a community-driven initiative to establish guidelines for quality assessment and reproducibility for instruments and images in light microscopy. J. Microsc. 284, 5673 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Faklaris, O. et al. Quality assessment in light microscopy for routine use through simple tools and robust metrics. J. Cell Biol. 221, e202107093 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Bik, E. M., Casadevall, A. & Fang, F. C. The prevalence of inappropriate image duplication in biomedical research publications. mBio 7, e0080916 (2016). This paper is a thorough quantitative and systematic analysis of image manipulations in publications. The paper has had a profound impact on scientific communities and highlighted the need to improve image quality.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Bik, E. M., Fang, F. C., Kullas, A. L., Davis, R. J. & Casadevall, A. Analysis and correction of inappropriate image duplication: the molecular and cellular biology experience. Mol. Cell. Biol. 38, e00309-18 (2018).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Cromey, D. W. Digital images are data: and should be treated as such. Methods Mol. Biol. 931, 127 (2013).

CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. CSEs Recommendations for Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/wp-content/uploads/entire_whitepaper.pdf (2023).

Rossner, M. & Yamada, K. M. Whats in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation. J. Cell Biol. 166, 1115 (2004).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Van Noorden, R. Publishers launch joint effort to tackle altered images in research papers. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01410-9 (2020).

Koppers, L., Wormer, H. & Ickstadt, K. Towards a systematic screening tool for quality assurance and semiautomatic fraud detection for images in the life sciences. Sci. Eng. Ethics 23, 11131128 (2017).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Bucci, E. M. Automatic detection of image manipulations in the biomedical literature. Cell Death Dis. 9, 400 (2018).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Van Noorden, R. Journals adopt AI to spot duplicated images in manuscripts. Nature 601, 1415 (2022).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Martin, C. & Blatt, M. Manipulation and misconduct in the handling of image data. Plant Cell 25, 31473148 (2013).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Miura, K. & Norrelykke, S. F. Reproducible image handling and analysis. EMBO J. 40, e105889 (2021). This work demonstrates, with many examples, the importance of proper image analysis to avoid misleading images. The authors also make a strong case for creating reproducible figures with (for example, IJ-Macro) scripting.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Marqus, G., Pengo, T. & Sanders, M. A. Imaging methods are vastly underreported in biomedical research. eLife 9, e55133 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Nature Research Journals. Nature Guidelines https://www.nature.com/documents/nprot-guide-to-preparing-final-artwork.pdf (2023).

Schmied, C. & Jambor, H. K. Effective image visualization for publicationsa workflow using open access tools and concepts. F1000Res. 9, 1373 (2020).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Cromey, D. W. Avoiding twisted pixels: ethical guidelines for the appropriate use and manipulation of scientific digital images. Sci. Eng. Ethics 16, 639667 (2010). This article provides a first set of guidelines on how to properly treat digital images in scientific publications.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Russ, J. C. The Image Processing Handbook (CRC, 2006).

Zuiderveld, K. in Graphics Gems 474485 (Elsevier, 1994).

Richardson, W. H. Bayesian-based iterative method of image restoration. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 62, 5559 (1972).

Article Google Scholar

Krull, A., Buchholz, T.-O. & Jug, F. Noise2Voidlearning denoising from single noisy images. In 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 21242132 (2019).

Weigert, M. et al. Content-aware image restoration: pushing the limits of fluorescence microscopy. Nat. Methods 15, 10901097 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Fish, D. A., Brinicombe, A. M., Pike, E. R. & Walker, J. G. Blind deconvolution by means of the RichardsonLucy algorithm. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 12, 5865 (1995).

Article Google Scholar

Crameri, F., Shephard, G. E. & Heron, P. J. The misuse of colour in science communication. Nat. Commun. 11, 5444 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Keene, D. R. A review of color blindness for microscopists: guidelines and tools for accommodating and coping with color vision deficiency. Microsc. Microanal. 21, 279289 (2015).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Linkert, M. et al. Metadata matters: access to image data in the real world. J. Cell Biol. 189, 777782 (2010).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Tedersoo, L. et al. Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines. Sci. Data 8, 192 (2021). Data sharing and availability are crucial for reproducibility. This paper clearly documents how current data-sharing practices fall short and discusses ways to improve.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Gabelica, M., Boji, R. & Puljak, L. Many researchers were not compliant with their published data sharing statement: a mixed-methods study. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 150, 3341 (2022).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Excerpt from:
Community-developed checklists for publishing images and image ... - Nature.com