↓ Skip to main content

Machine learning analysis of microbial flow cytometry data from nanoparticles, antibiotics and carbon sources perturbed anaerobic microbiomes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biological Engineering, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 299)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Machine learning analysis of microbial flow cytometry data from nanoparticles, antibiotics and carbon sources perturbed anaerobic microbiomes
Published in
Journal of Biological Engineering, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13036-018-0112-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abhishek S. Dhoble, Pratik Lahiri, Kaustubh D. Bhalerao

Abstract

Flow cytometry, with its high throughput nature, combined with the ability to measure an increasing number of cell parameters at once can surpass the throughput of prevalent genomic and metagenomic approaches in the study of microbiomes. Novel computational approaches to analyze flow cytometry data will result in greater insights and actionability as compared to traditional tools used in the analysis of microbiomes. This paper is a demonstration of the fruitfulness of machine learning in analyzing microbial flow cytometry data generated in anaerobic microbiome perturbation experiments. Autoencoders were found to be powerful in detecting anomalies in flow cytometry data from nanoparticles and carbon sources perturbed anaerobic microbiomes but was marginal in predicting perturbations due to antibiotics. A comparison between different algorithms based on predictive capabilities suggested that gradient boosting (GB) and deep learning, i.e. feed forward artificial neural network with three hidden layers (DL) were marginally better under tested conditions at predicting overall community structure while distributed random forests (DRF) worked better for predicting the most important putative microbial group(s) in the anaerobic digesters viz. methanogens, and it can be optimized with better parameter tuning. Predictive classification patterns with DL (feed forward artificial neural network with three hidden layers) were found to be comparable to previously demonstrated multivariate analysis. The potential applications of this approach have been demonstrated for monitoring the syntrophic resilience of the anaerobic microbiomes perturbed by synthetic nanoparticles as well as antibiotics. Machine learning can benefit the microbial flow cytometry research community by providing rapid screening and characterization tools to discover patterns in the dynamic response of microbiomes to several stimuli.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 9 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Environmental Science 6 9%
Computer Science 4 6%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 21 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,722,896
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biological Engineering
#39
of 299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,426
of 342,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biological Engineering
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.