Accurate and versatile 3D segmentation of plant tissues at cellular resolution

Abstract

Quantitative analysis of plant and animal morphogenesis requires accurate segmentation of individual cells in volumetric images of growing organs. In the last years, deep learning has provided robust automated algorithms that approach human performance, with applications to bio-image analysis now starting to emerge. Here, we present PlantSeg, a pipeline for volumetric segmentation of plant tissues into cells. PlantSeg employs a convolutional neural network to predict cell boundaries and graph partitioning to segment cells based on the neural network predictions. PlantSeg was trained on 1xed and live plant organs imaged with confocal and light sheet microscopes. PlantSeg delivers accurate results and generalizes well across different tissues, scales, acquisition settings even on non plant samples. We present results of PlantSeg applications in diverse developmental contexts. PlantSeg is free and open-source, with both a command line and a user-friendly graphical interface (https://github.com/hci-unihd/plant-seg).

Data availability

All data used in this study have been deposited in Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/uzq3w/Additionally Arabidopsis 3D Digital Tissue Atlas is available under https://osf.io/fzr56/

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Adrian Wolny

    Cell Biology and Biophysics Unit, EMBL, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lorenzo Cerrone

    Heidelberg Collaboratory for Image Processing, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Athul Vijayan

    School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Rachele Tofanelli

    School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5196-1122
  5. Amaya Vilches Barro

    Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Marion Louveaux

    Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Christian Wenzl

    Department of Stem Cell Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sören Strauss

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. David Wilson-Sánchez

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Rena Lymbouridou

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Susanne Steigleder

    Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Constantin Pape

    Cell Biology and Biophysics Unit, EMBL, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Alberto Bailoni

    Heidelberg Collaboratory for Image Processing, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Salva Duran-Nebreda

    School of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. George Bassel

    School of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Jan U Lohmann

    Department of Stem Cell Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3667-187X
  17. Miltos Tsiantis

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Fred Hamprecht

    Department of Stem Cell Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Kay Schneitz

    School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6688-0539
  20. Alexis Maizel

    Department of Stem Cell Biology, Centre for Organismal Studies, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Anna Kreshuk

    Cell Biology and Biophysics Unit, EMBL, Heidelberg, Germany
    For correspondence
    anna.kreshuk@embl.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1334-6388

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR2581)

  • Jan U Lohmann
  • Miltos Tsiantis
  • Fred Hamprecht
  • Kay Schneitz
  • Alexis Maizel
  • Anna Kreshuk

Leverhulme Trust (RPG-2016-049)

  • George Bassel

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2020, Wolny et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 13,450
    views
  • 1,546
    downloads
  • 194
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Adrian Wolny
  2. Lorenzo Cerrone
  3. Athul Vijayan
  4. Rachele Tofanelli
  5. Amaya Vilches Barro
  6. Marion Louveaux
  7. Christian Wenzl
  8. Sören Strauss
  9. David Wilson-Sánchez
  10. Rena Lymbouridou
  11. Susanne Steigleder
  12. Constantin Pape
  13. Alberto Bailoni
  14. Salva Duran-Nebreda
  15. George Bassel
  16. Jan U Lohmann
  17. Miltos Tsiantis
  18. Fred Hamprecht
  19. Kay Schneitz
  20. Alexis Maizel
  21. Anna Kreshuk
(2020)
Accurate and versatile 3D segmentation of plant tissues at cellular resolution
eLife 9:e57613.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57613

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57613

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    Sonal Gupta, Simon Niels Groen ... Michael D Purugganan
    Research Article

    Populations can adapt to stressful environments through changes in gene expression. However, the fitness effect of gene expression in mediating stress response and adaptation remains largely unexplored. Here, we use an integrative field dataset obtained from 780 plants of Oryza sativa ssp. indica (rice) grown in a field experiment under normal or moderate salt stress conditions to examine selection and evolution of gene expression variation under salinity stress conditions. We find that salinity stress induces increased selective pressure on gene expression. Further, we show that trans-eQTLs rather than cis-eQTLs are primarily associated with rice’s gene expression under salinity stress, potentially via a few master-regulators. Importantly, and contrary to the expectations, we find that cis-trans reinforcement is more common than cis-trans compensation which may be reflective of rice diversification subsequent to domestication. We further identify genetic fixation as the likely mechanism underlying this compensation/reinforcement. Additionally, we show that cis- and trans-eQTLs are under balancing and purifying selection, respectively, giving us insights into the evolutionary dynamics of gene expression variation. By examining genomic, transcriptomic, and phenotypic variation across a rice population, we gain insights into the molecular and genetic landscape underlying adaptive salinity stress responses, which is relevant for other crops and other stresses.

    1. Plant Biology
    Zigmunds Orlovskis, Archana Singh ... Saskia A Hogenhout
    Research Article

    Obligate parasites often trigger significant changes in their hosts to facilitate transmission to new hosts. The molecular mechanisms behind these extended phenotypes - where genetic information of one organism is manifested as traits in another - remain largely unclear. This study explores the role of the virulence protein SAP54, produced by parasitic phytoplasmas, in attracting leafhopper vectors. SAP54 is responsible for the induction of leaf-like flowers in phytoplasma-infected plants. However, we previously demonstrated that the insects were attracted to leaves and the leaf-like flowers were not required. Here, we made the surprising discovery that leaf exposure to leafhopper males is required for the attraction phenotype, suggesting a leaf response that distinguishes leafhopper sex in the presence of SAP54. In contrast, this phytoplasma effector alongside leafhopper females discourages further female colonization. We demonstrate that SAP54 effectively suppresses biotic stress response pathways in leaves exposed to the males. Critically, the host plant MADS-box transcription factor short vegetative phase (SVP) emerges as a key element in the female leafhopper preference for plants exposed to males, with SAP54 promoting the degradation of SVP. This preference extends to female colonization of male-exposed svp null mutant plants over those not exposed to males. Our research underscores the dual role of the phytoplasma effector SAP54 in host development alteration and vector attraction - integral to the phytoplasma life cycle. Importantly, we clarify how SAP54, by targeting SVP, heightens leaf vulnerability to leafhopper males, thus facilitating female attraction and subsequent plant colonization by the insects. SAP54 essentially acts as a molecular ‘matchmaker’, helping male leafhoppers more easily locate mates by degrading SVP-containing complexes in leaves. This study not only provides insights into the long reach of single parasite genes in extended phenotypes, but also opens avenues for understanding how transcription factors that regulate plant developmental processes intersect with and influence plant-insect interactions.