Point people/organizers: Lacra Bintu and Caterina Strambio De Castillia
4DN Google Drive folder: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EmBUDLIU0WDf-d09xB8YLBhidf_2A7c6?usp=sharing
4DN Calendar: https://wiki.4dnucleome.org/4dn:calendar_4dn (click here to add this specific WG calendar to your personal calendar)
Agenda/Minutes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cFqYZvOTPmLGUUwxohFchCD7G3v0qpkfN_HC33KX7Gc/edit?usp=sharing
Meeting attendee spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WeR515p6DT3RXG9FTzIDNtSjRetHbrbwJxmBo_9FLTc/edit?usp=sharing
Email list: image@4dnucleome.org
Slack channel: #wg-imaging
One of the main aims of 4DN Phase 2 is to improve the functional understanding of chromatin organization in health and disease. To this aim, it will be very important to define shared methods for the integration of genomics with imaging data. In this context the Imaging Working Group will serve two functions:
1) As a forum with the aim of defining clear short, mid-, and long-term strategies and solutions to improve the documentation, quality, reproducibility, sharing, and reusability value of imaging data within the 4DN and broader community. This will include the close collaboration with the Integrating Imaging and Omics Working Group and the exchange of information and collaboration with other NIH consortia and global imaging initiatives active in this space (e.g., BINA, Global Bioimaging, QUAREP-LiMi, etc.).
2) As a coordination platform to initiate sub-groups (SWG) that focuses on concrete barriers related to imaging within 4DN, as a discussion forum about solutions and as a place for such SWG to report the outcome of their work before implementing policies via the DCIC. Subgroups can have any format, should be led by their initiators, and typically aim to solve problems (or define clear strategies for the resolution of more complex problems) on a short time scale of 3-6 months. The IWG encourages all 4DN members to initiate SWGs based on their interests and needs. SWG should explicitly be open to being initiated by postdocs and staff scientists.
Work from IWG has been featured in a FOCUS issue on Nature Methods in December 2021
The purpose of this work is to develop a standard format to allow the exchange of imaging results and encourage the development of shared analysis, modeling and visualization pipelines.Currently, we are working on two formats to exchange FISH Omics results.
The first output of this sub-group is the proposed FISH Omics Format for Chromating Tracing (FOF-CT). We encourage the community to provide feedback ahead to approval from the November Steering Committee meeting. The format is available on our ReadTheDoc page and on GitHub:
IMPORTANT: All previous GoogleDoc and GoogleSheet representations of FOF-CT are now deprecated and no longer maintained.
Next meeting: 3/2/2021
The work of the Imaging Working Group is closely connected with the work of the following:
Ensuring Image Quality through the use of shared Quality Control procedures is essential to reproduce, interpret and compare microscopy data especially when image analysis (i.e., spot localization and tracking) is needed for results interpretation. As a starting point for this effort, during Ph1 the ISWG invested close to a year to create a common biological sample ( Szymborska et al., 2013) that could be used to compare results across labs. Scientists at EMBL, Cornell, the Hutch, and several other sites were engaged in acquiring images using the same biological sample to assess to what extent images and image metadata could be compared assuming a basic knowledge of the microscope. As expected by several of the ISWG leads, this effort failed dramatically. Specifically, even though all laboratories acquired images of a shared benchmarking sample, resulting images displayed significant variations across sites preventing direct comparison. In addition, the metadata collected at individual acquisition sites also varied dramatically resulting in widely different information content. And while a similar sample was used for comparing Single-molecule localization microscopes (SMLM; Thevathasan et al., 2019), tests conducted within 4DN laboratories revealed significant obstacles for using this biological sample across different microscope modalities. As a result, it was decided that the 4DN-Phase 1 ISWG should instead develop the following:
While the power of digital light microscopy is undeniable, rigorous record-keeping and quality control are required to define the limits to which the results of imaging experiments may be interpreted (quality), reproduced (reproducibility), used to extract reliable information and scientific knowledge, and shared for further analysis (value). At the same time, it is also clear that different experiments have different reporting requirements to ensure quality, reproducibility, and value. To address this issue, the 4DN-Phase 1 the ISWG working in conjunction with the Bioimaging North America (BINA) Quality Control and Data Management Working Group (QC-DM-WG) has developed a flexible and future proof framework that extends the specifications implemented in the Open Microscopy Environment (OME) Image Data Model (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-2005-6-5-r47; https://rupress.org/jcb/article/189/5/777/35828/Metadata-matters-access-to-image-data-in-the-real). This approach has been endorsed by several initiatives around the world including BINA, Quality Assessment, and Reproducibility for Light Microscopy (QUAREP-LiMi; https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.09153), Global Bioimaging (GBI), the Allen Institute of Cell Science and OME. It is fair to say that 4DN has launched a much-needed process that forms the basis of a wide community effort involving all major stakeholders (importantly including microscope manufacturers) and that has the potential to result in the first-ever widely accepted community-driven Microscopy Metadata specifications that scale with the complexity and intent of the experimental design, instrumentation and analytical requirements.The Tiered OME-extension system initially proposed by 4DN and revised by the BINA-QC-DM-WG provides the flexibility to:
During 4DN Phase 1, in response to the need to facilitate the rigorous collection of microscopy metadata, the Strambio De Castillia lab in collaboration with the Grunwald lab and the DCIC has developed an interactive software tool called the Micro-Meta App. Micro-Meta App can run both locally and within the DCIC webpage. It reads metadata that is stored within an image file and automatically fills the corresponding fields in a Tier-aware manner. The App displays a graphical rendition of a microscope and allows to interactively add individual parts while allowing the user to fill in metadata values that are needed at the chosen Tier level and providing feedback on missing information. If you do not have that information at hand the app provides you with the knowledge to ask your sales rep to please provide it to you.
MicroMeta provides a user interface to collect metadata about microscopes and, soon, their settings based on the 4DN-BINA-OME specifications.
To exchange quantitative results from imaging experiments, the 4DN-Ph1 IWG developed three data exchange formats that are currently utilized by the DCIC and could be applicable for Ph2:
These data exchange standards are extremely relevant for Phase 2 and could serve as a great starting point for further development. In addition, it is important to note that as part of the effort to develop a Next-Generation File Format for image data, the OME consortium is developing standards for recording Region of Interests (ROI), spots, and trajectories which is extremely relevant to this topic.