No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 17, 2026.
MorphoGraphX: A platform for quantifying morphogenesis in 4D
Pierre Barbier de Reuille, Anne-Lise Routier-Kierzkowska, Daniel Kierzkowski and 25 more
eLife · 2015 · CC BY
Abstract
Morphogenesis emerges from complex multiscale interactions between genetic and mechanical processes. To understand these processes, the evolution of cell shape, proliferation and gene expression must be quantified. This quantification is usually performed either in full 3D, which is computationally expensive and technically challenging, or on 2D planar projections, which introduces geometrical artifacts on highly curved organs. Here we present MorphoGraphX (www.MorphoGraphX.org), a software that bridges this gap by working directly with curved surface images extracted from 3D data. In addition to traditional 3D image analysis, we have developed algorithms to operate on curved surfaces, such as cell segmentation, lineage tracking and fluorescence signal quantification. The software's modular design makes it easy to include existing libraries, or to implement new algorithms. Cell geometries extracted with MorphoGraphX can be exported and used as templates for simulation models, providing a powerful platform to investigate the interactions between shape, genes and growth.
Full text
From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 17, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.
Introduction
Morphogenesis of multicellular organisms occurs through multiscale interactions of genetic networks, cell-to-cell signaling, growth and cell division. Because of the complexity of temporal and spatial interactions involved, computer simulations are becoming widely used in what is now being called Computational Morphodynamics. Key to this methodology is the combination of time-lapse microscopy to quantify changes in cell geometry and gene expression with dynamic spatial modeling. Confocal microscopy is frequently the tool of choice for data collection, as the proliferation of fluorescence markers and variations in the method make it possible to visualize proteins, organelles, cell boundaries, and even protein–protein interaction and protein movement in vivo. Other technologies such as serial block-face scanning electron microscopy (SEM) make it possible to study sub-cellular structures at a much higher resolution on fixed samples. However, despite the rapid advancement of 3D imaging technologies, there is a lack of methods and software to process and quantify these data and to integrate them within simulation environments.
Most simulation models of morphogenesis operate on 2D templates. This is not surprising since many key biological processes occur on surfaces, for example in epithelial layers. Morphogenesis involves complex 3D deformation, such as folding during gastrulation in animal systems or bulging out of new lateral organs in plants, causing significant curvature in the tissues controlling these events. It is therefore essential to be able to quantify cell shapes and fluorescence-based reporters on curved surface layers of cells. The simplest method to achieve this is to take several image slices and project them onto a single plane. However, when trying to quantify cell shape change, division orientations, or growth, distortions due to the projection quickly become too large as the angle between the surface and the projection plane increases. Even small amounts of tissue curvature can hinder the accurate imaging of a single cell layer over an entire sample. To alleviate some of these issues, methods have been developed to determine the 3D position of cell junctions on the surface, while the segmentation into cells is still performed on flat 2D images. However these approaches are labor intensive, limited to tissues that can be visualized as a flat 2D image, and are not accurate when the angle of the tissue with the projection plane becomes too large. Furthermore, methods based on tissue casts combined with stereo reconstruction of SEM images need to be combined with methods using fluorescent markers if gene expression is to be monitored.
Here we present a method and the open-source software MorphoGraphX (www.MorphoGraphX.org, Box 1) to quantify the temporal evolution of cellular geometry and fluorescence signal on curved 2D surface layers of cells over multiple time points in both plants and animals. In addition to 2D curved surfaces, MorphoGraphX also possesses a rich set of tools for full 3D image processing and cell segmentation, and can be used to easily transfer realistic cell geometries and fluorescent marker data into computational modeling environments. MorphoGraphX is built from a collection of loadable modules (shared libraries), centered around an interactive visualization core that exploits the latest features of modern Graphics Processing Units (GPUs). This design allows the software to be easily adapted to changing research needs, and facilitates the integration of algorithms from other open-source imaging processing libraries into a custom work flow. The software is the first of its kind specialized to process curved surface layers of cells, and here we demonstrate its capabilities both in plant and animal systems.
3D visualization of voxels and meshes
Modern imaging technologies today provide us with an abundance of data from a variety of sources: Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy, Magnetic Resonance Imaging and block-face SEM all provide full 3D volumetric data that can be rendered in MorphoGraphX (Figure 1, Video 1). Our software can also process surfaces, which can be imported from 3D scanners, reconstructions from Stereo-SEM images, focus stacking microscopes and scanning probe methods such as Cellular Force Microscopy (CFM), or extracted within MorphoGraphX from full 3D data sets (Figure 1). MorphoGraphX contains a highly optimized rendering engine that is capable of accurate rendering of both semi-transparent surfaces and volumetric data simultaneously. Surfaces are represented by an oriented triangular mesh, which is typically extracted from the surface of an object, and thus represents the outermost tissue layer (Figure 1A,C,D), or the boundaries of individual 3D objects (e.g., cells) in the case of full 3D segmentation (Figure 1B). Once processed, surfaces and associated data can be exported in a variety of file formats suitable for loading into modeling or analysis softwares, allowing the direct use of sample geometry in computer simulations.
Feature extraction on curved surfaces
A key strength of MorphoGraphX is the ability to summarize 3D data as a curved surface image. After extracting the shape of an organ, 3D data just below the surface can be projected onto it, creating a curved image of the outer layer of cells (Figure 2). This enables the extraction of precise cell outlines without the distortions associated with a flat 2D projection (Figure 2—figure supplement 1). We have found that many algorithms designed for 2 and 3D image processing can be adapted to our curved surface images. Feature extraction in MorphoGraphX typically follows a pattern: (i) volumetric data (often a cell outline marker) is pre-processed to remove noise or obstructions; (ii) the object of interest is turned into a mask (binary image); (iii) the object is extracted as a surface mesh; (iv) volumetric data is projected onto the surface; (v) the projection is used for segmentation of the surface into cells (Figure 2, Video 2). The segmentation can be fully automatic (Video 3) or directed by manually placed seeds. Steps (i–iii) can be repeated as surfaces of interest will often be used to help pre-processing the volumetric data. For example, surfaces can be used to trim the 3D image (Figure 2—figure supplement 2), or to select regions of interest for data analysis.
Interaction with Bezier surfaces
MorphoGraphX allows user-defined surfaces to interact with volumetric data both for visualization and feature extraction. The researcher can interactively define Bezier surfaces to visualize curved slices through an object. By manipulating the Bezier control points it is possible to fit almost any shape to a surface of interest within the sample. An extreme example of this is shown in Figure 2H where the surface has been shaped to display the cortical cells of a mature Arabidopsis embryo. The Bezier surface can be converted to a triangular mesh, and segmented into cells with the same procedure used for Figure 2A–E. The extracted tissue geometry can be then used, for example, as template for simulations.
Signal quantification
Once a surface is segmented into cells, data collected simultaneously on a different channel, such as a GFP fusion to a protein of interest, can then be projected onto the segmented surface (Figure 3). This allows the quantification of genetic expression and protein localization at the cellular, or sub-cellular scale. As with the cell outlines, the projection creates a curved image of the data that can be processed in a similar way as a planar 2D image. Many tools commonly used for the analysis of flat images (for example in softwares such as Adobe Photoshop, Gimp and ImageJ) have been adapted for use on curved surfaces in MorphoGraphX. This includes Gaussian blur, erosion, dilation, morphological closing, local minima detection, normalization, etc. The flexibility of this approach is demonstrated by our implementation of more complex algorithms, such as the watershed transform for cell segmentation and our adaptation of an algorithm based on signal gradients to compute the orientation of microtubules (Figure 3A, Figure 3—figure supplement 3) that was previously implemented in 2D.
Signal coming from different tissue layers can be visualized and quantified by adjusting the depth of projection (Figure 3B–E). This is particularly useful to distinguish protein expression levels at different depths within an organ. As an illustration, in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis thaliana we can observe that the auxin efflux carrier PINFORMED1 (PIN1) is first upregulated in the epidermis at the site of incipient primordium initiation before being activated in deeper layers (Figure 3C,D and Figure 3—figure supplement 1).
Quantification can also be performed at the sub-cellular scale. The amount of fluorescence signal projected onto the triangle mesh can be divided into a membrane localized portion and a cell interior portion (Figure 3E and Figure 3—figure supplement 2). This is accomplished by summing all the signal within a fixed distance from a cell border and considering it as being associated with the membrane, while all the signal further away from the cell outline is called internal. The process can be used to quantify what portion of a tagged protein, for example, the auxin efflux carrier PIN1, is localized to the plasma membrane or internalized.
Projection of the signal on the surface allows to summarize essential information from several channels of a large confocal data set into a very compact form. For example, the global shape of the sample can be extracted from an autofluorescence signal, while the cell wall or membrane marker collected in another channel is used to segment cells and obtain their geometry. The expression level of a protein from a third channel may then be quantified at the cellular level based on the segmentation. Finally, several samples in a time lapse experiment can be compared to obtain information about the temporal evolution of shape and gene expression.
Time lapse analysis
In addition to data from single image stacks, MorphoGraphX is able to process and compare multiple time points. This enables the analysis of stacks before and after experimental treatments, or time-lapse data. This capability relies on an efficient method to co-segment samples from two time points. One approach is to segment both stacks separately and then to use an automated algorithm to match the points. However, automatic segmentation and matching can be prone to errors that have to be checked and corrected by hand, which can be very time-consuming depending on the error rate. For this we have developed a user-friendly interface in MorphoGraphX to manually identify cell lineages on curved surfaces representing the tissue at different time points (Video 4). Errors in lineage are detected automatically by comparing the neighborhoods of daughter cells and their parents. Once the co-segmentation is complete, changes in cell area or gene expression over the interval between two time points can be computed and visualized as a heatmap (Figure 4). Cell proliferation can also be visualized as a colormap, along with marking of the new walls (Figure 4). Pairwise correspondence between time points can be combined in longer time series (Figure 4—figure supplement 3), for example to perform clonal analysis over several days. The data can be output in various formats for further processing, such as the comparison of growth rates with protein expression levels or microtubule orientations.
Growth directions and anisotropy
In addition to extracting areal growth rates from time-lapse data, MorphoGraphX can also be used to quantify growth directions and anisotropy. The cell junctions (Figure 4—figure supplement 1) are used as landmarks to compute the two dimensional Principal Directions of Growth (PDGs) of the surface associated with each cell. The cell lineage information is used to account for cell division and identify only the junctions that are conserved in between time points (Figure 4—figure supplement 2). Principal growth directions and their associated magnitudes can be displayed on the surface of the simplified mesh used for the computation, or stored to be later displayed on the original mesh. The growth anisotropy is computed from the magnitudes of the growth directions (Figure 4—figure supplement 2). For visual clarity, growth directions can optionally be displayed only in cells in which the anisotropy is above a user-defined threshold (Figure 4D).
Other directional quantities can also be computed, stored and displayed in MorphoGraphX on a cellular basis. For example, the local tissue curvature can be calculated based on the position of the neighbors closer than a given radius and displayed in a manner similar to the growth directions (Figure 4B and Figure 4—figure supplement 3), making it a convenient tool for precise staging of fast growing organs such at the shoot apical meristem.
Growth dynamics of the stem cell niche in the tomato shoot apex
We demonstrate the capabilities of MorphoGraphX by quantifying growth of the stem cell niche and surrounding tissue in the shoot apex of tomato with time lapse imaging over several days (Figure 4 and Figure 4—figure supplement 3). The shoot apex is the source of all the aerial structure of the plant. At the summit, a slow growing central zone harbors the stem cell niche, surrounded by a fast growing peripheral zone where organ initiation occurs. The analysis in MorphoGraphX starts with surface extraction followed by manual or automatic segmentation (Videos 2, 3), and lineage matching (Video 4) of all of the time points in the series. We observed similar patterns of growth, cell proliferation and organ geometry in the tomato shoot apex as those reported in other species. The first geometrical indicator of primordium initiation we noted was a slightly elevated curvature at the corner of the meristem. This early change in shape coincided with increased growth in the peripheral zone. The peripheral zone itself displayed differential growth dependent on the dynamics of primordium initiation. Regions adjacent to older primordia exhibited fast, highly anisotropic expansion (Figure 4 and Figure 4—figure supplement 3). In contrast, the part of the meristem closest to the newly separated primordium (P1 in Figure 4) was not distinguishable based on growth rates. As previously observed in Anagallis arvensis, this accelerating growth of the peripheral zone progressively pushed away newly formed organs as they differentiated, making more space available on the meristem for further initiation and suggesting a possible feedback between lateral organ growth and meristem expansion.
In addition to changes in geometry and growth, we used an activity reporter of the growth hormone auxin, pDR5::3xVENUS-N7, to follow primordium development. Interestingly, while auxin activity is already visible at the first sign of primordium initiation, DR5 expression does not strictly correlate with growth. In particular, no DR5 signal is detected in the fast expanding regions close to older primordia. We also found that DR5 expression is present in the crease separating young primordia from the meristem, an area where the cells exhibited a slight decrease in surface area (Figure 4D). As shown in previous studies, the quantification of growth anisotropy shows that cells in the boundary displayed a small increase in length only in the direction parallel to the border between meristem and primordium, suggesting compression by the growing organ (Figure 4D and Figure 4—figure supplements 2, 3).
3D cell segmentation and analysis
The extraction of cellular 3D shape is of paramount importance for different purposes, such as to study volumetric deformation, quantify fluorescence expression in 3D, or generate cellular templates for 3D simulation models (Figure 5D). However, volumetric segmentation requires very high quality of signals, since the cell outlines must be visible from all angles. For plant tissues, which often display autofluorescence, 3D segmentation of cells from confocal images is therefore mainly used in the case of cleared, fixed samples (Figure 5B–D) or limited to the outermost layers of cells (Figures 5A, 6D). The penetration of confocal images for 3D segmentation of live samples could be improved by using multi-photon confocal microscopy. Another possibility is to combine confocal stacks acquired from different angles. Currently it is possible to assemble data from multiple angle acquisition within MorphoGraphX.
MorphoGraphX uses the auto-seeded, morphological watershed algorithm available in the Insight Segmentation and Registration Toolkit (ITK) for 3D segmentation. We have developed a collection of user-friendly 3D voxel editing tools allowing the researcher to correct segmentation errors. Alternatively, cells and other objects which are not in contact with each other can be segmented by extracting the surface of the individual objects (Figure 1B, Video1). As with 2D surfaces of cells, geometrical properties (surface area, wall length, volume) and fluorescent signal (e.g., total signal per cell, membrane localization) of the 3D cells can be quantified (Figure 5) and exported to spreadsheet files for further analysis. Cells segmented in 3D can also be exported for use in simulation models, where highly realistic geometries are required (Figure 5D).
Validation of the method
When projecting data onto surface meshes several sources of error should be considered. Since the Z dimension in confocal images is typically considerably lower in resolution than in XY, it is possible that the view angle affects the results. To estimate the error introduced by this effect, we imaged the same sample twice from different angles. Co-segmentation with approximately 30° difference in view angle lead to small segmentation differences, averaging to less than 2% (Figure 6A,B). Note that there is no obvious bias from the view angle.
Another potential source of error comes from representing 3D cells as a 2D surface. To estimate the error introduced by this abstraction, we co-segmented two time points of growth in the same tomato shoot apex as that shown in Figure 4. The cells were segmented on the curved 2D surface, and the process was repeated from the same sample by segmenting the surface layer of cells in full 3D. The heat maps of volume increase in 3D show the same areas of slow and fast growth as the surface segmentation. In cases when the tissue thickness is preserved over growth, as in the epidermal layer of the shoot apex, tracking cell expansion on the surface is therefore a reasonable approximation for volumetric cell expansion (Figure 6C,D).
MorphoGraphX offers the possibility to segment cells automatically (Video 3) or to place the seeds for watershed segmentation manually (Video 2). While automatic segmentation is faster in the case of high quality data, manual seeding is recommended in regions where part of the signal is too faint or blurry, partially masking the cell outline. To estimate the error in our auto-segmentation method, we compared the number of cells segmented automatically vs manually on the same region of two high quality samples. For a tomato shoot apex sample, the auto-segmentation error rate was about 2%, with only 12 cells under-segmented (fused) and 1 cell over-segmented (split) over a total of 576 cells (Figure 6E). Once detected, segmentation errors can be easily fixed by the researcher (Video 3). Automatic seeding considerably shortens the time needed to segment large samples, such as a Drosophila wing disc (Figure 6F). The total number of cells varied by about 3% (6304 autosegmented vs 6510 manually seeded cells).
Discussion
A key strength of our MorphoGraphX software is the ability to accurately extract curved surface meshes from 3D volumetric data and perform image processing on the resulting curved (2.5D) surface images. This has wide application, since many biological processes happen on surfaces, and the method has been proven in both animal and plant systems, in embryonic as well as mature tissues. The method is especially powerful for time-lapse confocal imaging, where laser exposure has to be kept to a minimum, limiting penetration to the outermost layers of the sample. In addition to curved surface image processing, MorphoGraphX provides an intuitive and user-friendly interface for the visualization and editing of 3D volumetric data, making it possible to digitally remove obstructing objects from the surface of interest, such as the peripodial membrane overlying the Drosophila wing disc. We have also included a range of standard 3D image processing tools, similar to those available in many other softwares. These can be used for 3D segmentation, or to pre-process data before surface extraction.
The modular design of MorphoGraphX allows the integration of existing libraries and the creation of custom processing ‘pipelines’, going from the raw microscopy image to feature extraction and fluorescence quantification. MorphoGraphX is implemented as a collection of shared libraries, and new libraries can be added or removed without recompiling MorphoGraphX. This combines the functionality of plugins with the computational efficiency of C++. The most common operations for 3D visualization, filtering and editing have been written to exploit the massively parallel architecture of modern graphics cards, which can have thousands of processing cores. As a result, 3D operations that would normally be very slow to run on a common PC take seconds to perform, making use of the computational power of inexpensive consumer graphics cards. Many of the more complex operations use the multi-core capabilities of the CPU. This makes most operations interactive and user-friendly, allowing the researcher to easily experiment with new work flows, algorithms and parameters. The flexibility of MorphoGraphX also simplifies the development of modules to import 3D voxel data and cellular or surfaces meshes from other custom imaging platforms. Such bridges have been created to import data from recently published growth tracking softwares including the MARS-ALT multi angle reconstruction pipeline, and the stereo SEM reconstruction software.
MorphoGraphX has been used to quantify cell size, growth and proliferation, mechanical properties and protein localization, as well as 3D cell geometry. In addition to quantification, a current challenge in understanding development is to integrate these new data with computational models. Cellular geometry extracted from biological samples can be easily exchanged with modeling tools, such as Organism and VVe. Meshes extracted in MorphoGraphX can be used directly for realistic simulation templates, or simplified depending on modeling requirements. Examples include simulation models of hormone transport, cell division plane analysis and 3D cellular models of tissue mechanics.
MorphoGraphX was developed by researchers and designed to be easily adaptable to new research requirements. Its user interface was built in close collaboration with experimentalists, with features and techniques added to address research problems and bottlenecks in work flows as they have arisen. Fully automatic tools are complemented with intuitive methods for interactive correction and validation, greatly increasing the utility of new and existing algorithms.
Streamlined data exchange with modeling tools allows cell geometry and gene expression data to be used as model inputs, and facilitates the validation of simulation results. These features combine to make MorphoGraphX a significant step towards an interdisciplinary computational morphodynamics platform to study the interactions between growth, mechanics and gene expression.
Raw data acquisition
Live confocal time-lapse series of developing flower of A. thaliana Col-0 (Figure 2A–F and Figure 2—figure supplement 2), shoot apical meristem of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) DR5 reporter line (Figure 4—figure supplement 3) and leaf trichomes of Capsella rubella (Figure 5A) were acquired using SP8 or SP5 Leica confocal microscopes, as described previously. After dissection samples were stained with 0.1% propidium iodide (PI) and grown in vitro on medium. Confocal imaging was performed with a 63× long distance water immersion objective and an argon laser emitting at the wavelength of 488 nm. PI signal was collected at 600–665 nm. In the case of tomato shoot apex, pDR5::3xVENUS-N7 signal was also collected, at 505–545 nm. Distance between stacks was 0.5 μm. Time intervals were 11 hr for tomato and 24 hr for A. thaliana and C. rubella time lapse series.
Mature A. thaliana embryos (Figure 2H) were fixed and stained as previously described and imaged using a Zeiss LSM710 confocal microscope with a 25× oil immersion lens. Confocal stacks of microtubule marker line TUA6-GFP in live Cardamine hirsuta fruits (Figure 3A) were acquired using a SP2 Leica microscope, with a 40× long working distance water immersion objective and an argon laser emitting at 488 nm. GFP signal was collected at 495–545 nm. The z step between stack slices was 0.2 μm.
The sequential replica method was used to acquire a stereopair of SEM images from an Arabidospsis leaf surface (Figure 1D) as described in. Stereoscopic reconstruction was then performed for the stereo pair and converted into a triangular mesh using a custom MorphoGraphX module. All other data presented in this manuscript were acquired for previously published work or available through on-line catalogs.
Software design and data representation
MorphoGraphX is written in C++ and has been developed on GNU/Linux. For GPU processing, MorphoGraphX uses CUDA (https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-zone) via the Thrust template library (http://thrust.github.io). Multi-threaded host processing is done using OpenMP (http://openmp.org/wp/). CUDA requires a compatible nVidia (http://www.nvidia.com) graphics card. The user interface is designed in Qt4 (http://qt-project.org/), and OpenGL is used for 3D rendering (http://www.opengl.org).
MorphoGraphX can be extended using either C++ modules or Python scripts. C++ modules can be loaded at the start of MorphoGraphX through a plug-in system, inspired by the shared library loading architecture of Lpfg in VLab. C++ processes can access all the internal data structures used in MorphoGraphX and modify them as needed. They can also call other processes or query for their existence, and get parameter values in a uniform way from the graphical user interface. The last parameter values used for each process are stored in the project (.mgxv) file for future reference. All process calls and their parameters are logged to a re-playable python script log file created in the current directory. Each process is represented as a light C++ object defining the name, parameters and code of the process and is bundled in shared libraries for easy distribution. The shared library is placed into a system or user process folder, and the processes it contains are loaded upon startup.
Python scripts can also be written and executed within MorphoGraphX using the Python Script process. This option offers a more limited interaction with MorphoGraphX as a script is only able to launch other processes and not directly interact with the data structure. However, it allows use of the wealth of modules existing for Python 2.7 for file interactions and data analysis. Most data analysis processes import/export their data as CSV files to facilitate the writing of Python modules for complex or ad-hoc data analysis.
Surfaces are represented by vertex–vertex systems, which implement graph rotation systems. Properties can be stored in the mesh, such as the label attributed to an individual vertex, the normal associated to it or a value for the projected signal. The rendering uses a modified front-to-back depth peeling technique interweaving the volumetric rendering between peels of translucent surfaces. The volumetric rendering itself is done using volume ray casting, using the depth of the successive pair of peels to limit the ray casting to the region currently being rendered. This method allows for correct polygon–polygon and polygon-volume intersections. Combined with occlusion detection, we implemented early ray termination when the total opacity of the current fragment becomes too high for subsequent peels to be visible.
MorphoGraphX can be easily extended to import and export voxel and triangle mesh data in various formats. For voxel data, MorphoGraphX can read and write the tiff format compatible with ImageJ or Fiji. 3D data can also be loaded from series of 2D images using any of the various image formats supported by the C++ Template Image Processing Toolkit (CImg). The Visualization Toolkit (VTK) is used to import and export VTK triangle meshes. Various other formats, such as the Stanford Polygon File format (.ply), Wavefront's Object format (.obj) or 3D Systems StereoLithography format (.stl), are also supported directly. For many of the mesh imports, polygons with be converted to triangles upon loading by generating a center point and making a triangle fan.
Feature extraction from volumetric data
The first step in processing the data stacks is to remove noise and then identify the which voxels belong inside of the organ (Figure 2A,B). 3D image processing filters for noise reduction are followed by edge detection combined with feature filling. Once the inside of the organ is identified it is represented as a binary image (Figure 2B). Next the surface is extracted using a variant of the marching cubes algorithm. Fairly large cubes are used, creating a relatively coarse mesh and avoiding the extraction of very small features due to surface noise (Figure 2C). Once a coarse surface mesh is extracted, it is uniformly subdivided. The resolution of this initial mesh has to be sufficient for a first segmentation, which can be subsequently refined.
After the surface is extracted and subdivided, a column of signal normal to the surface is projected onto the mesh at every vertex, creating a 2D curved image of the cell outlines on the surface layer (see Figure 2D, Video 2). The image is segmented into cells using a seeded watershed segmentation algorithm. After blurring the image, auto-seeding is performed by finding local minima of signal within a given radius. Seeds are then propagated with watershed. Depending on the radius used for detecting the local minima, several seeds can be placed within a single cell, resulting in over-segmentation. The cells are later merged, based on the relative strength of signal on the walls separating them (Video 3). Normalization of the signal with a radius greater than that of the largest cell typically improves merging results. For convenience, the processes are chained together in a single auto-segmentation process. The final segmentation is then manually corrected. The amount of manual correction required can vary depending on signal quality, and in some cases it can be more efficient to perform some or all of the seeding manually.
We have placed emphasis on designing the user interface for MorphoGraphX to streamline the process of manual seeding and segmentation correction (Videos 2, 3).
After the initial segmentation, the edges of the cells will often look rough, as there are not enough points to describe them correctly. To extract the geometry more precisely, the mesh can be subdivided specifically at the interfaces between cells (Figure 2F) or in areas of high signal intensity. After subdivision the signal is re-projected, and the surface segmented again. The seeds are retained during this process so that re-seeding is not required. Several steps of subdivision and re-segmentation can be applied until the desired precision is achieved (Video 2). The resulting mesh will be dense around the areas of interest (e.g., the interface between cells), while keeping the areas of low interest (the inside of cells) coarse, thus limiting the total size of the mesh file.
Cell growth and geometry analysis
Once the cells have been segmented from two different time points, the cells and their progeny can be identified manually. Each mesh is loaded in a separate channel and roughly aligned manually so that the cells outlines match. For each cell in the second time point, the user identify a mother cell with a mouse click (Video 4). The lineage information is then used to compare cell size (areal growth) or the projected signal intensity in the original cells and their daughters.
A segmented mesh contains information about the cells neighborhood, that is, which are the cell walls shared by two cells and where do the cell walls intersect. The mesh can be simplified to contain only vertices necessary to describe each cell contour and the connections between neighbor cells (Figure 4—figure supplement 1). Plant cells do not slide with respect to each other, therefore the junction between cell walls can be used as landmarks to track tissue deformation over time series. Combined with the cell lineage information, the simplified cellular mesh (Figure 4—figure supplement 1) is used to find the correspondence between cell junctions in meshes extracted from different time points (Figure 4—figure supplement 2). After identifying pairs of junctions conserved in both meshes using the lineage information, we project for each cell the junctions on the average cell plane and compute a best fit of the 2D transformation (translation, rotation, anisotropic scaling) that will minimize the squared distance between pairs of junctions. Decomposing the transformation into singular vectors and values gives the PDGs and associated scaling values (PDGmax, PDGmin), that describe anisotropic growth. Anisotropy values used in (Figure 4 and Figure 4—figure supplements 2, 3) were computed according to the following definition: anisotropy = PDGmax/PDGmin.
The cellular mesh can also be used to compute other quantities, such as the tissue curvature (Figure 3—figure supplement 1 and Figure 4—figure supplement 3). In that case the vertices belonging to the cell outline are used to compute the principal curvatures for each cell center, within a given periphery. Color maps resulting from the computation of growth, curvature, signal quantification, etc. can be written to a spreadsheet giving easy access for further processing. Similarly, cell axis vectors can also be exported to be either re-rendered in MorphoGraphX or loaded for further analysis using other software, such as Matlab or Python.
Volumetric (3D) segmentation
The ITK auto-seeded watershed segmentation algorithm implemented in MorphoGraphX was used to segment the cells in 3D in Figures 5, 6D. After segmentation the cell surface is extracted using marching cubes and labeled. In some cases individual cells can also be segmented using a custom edge detect function from multiple angles (Figure 1B, Video 1). MorphoGraphX also provides the possibility to stitch stacks or combine multi angle stacks in 3D. However, this is not a pre-requisite for 3D segmentation in MorphoGraphX.
References 68
- 1.
Aegerter-Wilmsen T, Heimlicher MB, Smith AC, de Reuille PB, Smith RS, Aegerter CM, Basler K. Integrating force-sensing and signaling pathways in a model for the regulation of wing imaginal disc size. Development. 2012;139:3221-3231.
Not in our library10.1242/dev.082800
- 2.
Bassel GW, Stamm P, Mosca G, Barbier de Reuille P, Gibbs DJ, Winter R, Janka A, Holdsworth MJ, Smith RS. Mechanical constraints imposed by 3D cellular geometry and arrangement modulate growth patterns in the Arabidopsis embryo. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA. 2014;111:8685-8690.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1404616111
- 3.
Bayer E, Smith RS, Mandel T, Nakayama N, Sauer M, Prusinkiewicz P, Kuhlemeier C. Integration of transport-based models for phyllotaxis and midvein formation. Genes & Development. 2009;23:373-384.
Not in our library10.1101/gad.497009
- 4.
Bloomenthal J. Polygonization of implicit surfaces. Computer Aided Geometric Design. 1988;5:341-355.
Not in our library10.1016/0167-8396(88)90013-1
- 5.
Boudaoud A, Burian A, Borowska-Wykręt D, Uyttewaal M, Wrzalik R, Kwiatkowska D, Hamant O. FibrilTool, an ImageJ plug-in to quantify fibrillar structures in raw microscopy images. Nature Protocols. 2014;9:457-463.
Not in our library10.1038/nprot.2014.024
- 6.
Butler LC, Blanchard GB, Kabla AJ, Lawrence NJ, Welchman DP, Mahadevan L, Adams RJ, Sanson B. Cell shape changes indicate a role for extrinsic tensile forces in Drosophila germ-band extension. Nature Cell Biology. 2009;11:859-864.
Not in our library10.1038/ncb1894
- 7.
Chickarmane V, Roeder AH, Tarr PT, Cunha A, Tobin C, Meyerowitz EM. Computational morphodynamics: a modeling framework to understand plant growth. Annual Review of Plant Biology. 2010;61:65-87.
Not in our library10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112213
- 8.
Chitwood DH, Headland LR, Ranjan A, Martinez CC, Braybrook SA, Koenig DP, Kuhlemeier C, Smith RS, Sinha NR. Leaf asymmetry as a developmental constraint imposed by auxin-dependent phyllotactic patterning. The Plant Cell. 2012;24:2318-2327.
Not in our library10.1105/tpc.112.098798
- 9.
de Reuille PB, Bohn-Courseau I, Godin C, Traas J. A protocol to analyse cellular dynamics during plant development. The Plant Journal. 2005;44:1045-1053.
Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-313x.2005.02576.x
- 10.
De Rybel B, Möller B, Yoshida S, Grabowicz I, Barbier de Reuille P, Boeren S, Smith RS, Borst JW, Weijers D. A bHLH complex controls embryonic vascular tissue establishment and indeterminate growth in Arabidopsis. Developmental Cell. 2013;24:426-437.
Not in our library10.1016/j.devcel.2012.12.013
- 11.
- 12.
Dumais J, Kwiatkowska D. Analysis of surface growth in shoot apices. The Plant Journal. 2002;31:229-241.
Not in our library10.1046/j.1365-313x.2001.01350.x
- 13.
Dumais J, Steele C. New evidence for the role of mechanical forces in the shoot apical meristem. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2000;19:7-18.
Not in our library10.1007/s003440000003
- 14.
Elsner J, Michalski M, Kwiatkowska D. Spatiotemporal variation of leaf epidermal cell growth: a quantitative analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana wild-type and triple cyclinD3 mutant plants. Annals of Botany. 2012;109:897-910.
Not in our library10.1093/aob/mcs005
- 15.
Everitt C. Interactive order-independent transparency. 2001;7.
Not in our library
- 16.
Federici F, Dupuy L, Laplaze L, Heisler M, Haseloff J. Integrated genetic and computation methods for in planta cytometry. Nature Methods. 2012;9:483-485.
Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.1940
- 17.
Federl P, Prusinkiewicz P. Virtual laboratory: an interactive software environment for computer graphics. Proceedings of Computer Graphics International. 1999;93-100.
Not in our library
- 18.
Fernandez R, Das P, Mirabet V, Moscardi E, Traas J, Verdeil JL, Malandain G, Godin C. Imaging plant growth in 4D: robust tissue reconstruction and lineaging at cell resolution. Nature Methods. 2010;7:547-553.
Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.1472
- 19.
Goldfeather J, Interrante V. A Novel Cubic-Order Algorithm for Approximating Principal Direction Vectors. ACM Transactions on Graphics. 2004;23(1):45-63.
Not in our library
- 20.
Goodall C, Green P. Quantitative analysis of surface growth. Botanical Gazette. 1986;147:1-15.
Not in our library10.1086/337562
- 21.
Grandjean O, Vernoux T, Laufs P, Belcram K, Mizukami Y, Traas J. In vivo analysis of cell division, cell growth, and differentiation at the shoot apical meristem in Arabidopsis. The Plant Cell. 2004;16:74-87.
Not in our library10.1105/tpc.017962
- 22.
Green PB, Havelange A, Bernier G. Floral morphogenesis in Anagallis: scanning-electron-micrograph sequences from individual growing meristems before, during, and after the transition to flowering. Planta. 1991;185:502-512.
Not in our library10.1007/bf00202959
- 23.
Hamant O, Heisler M, Jönsson H, Krupinski P, Uyttewaal M, Bokov P, Corson F, Sahlin P, Boudaoud A, Meyerowitz EM, Couder Y, Traas J. Developmental patterning by mechanical signals in Arabidopsis. Science. 2008;322:1650-1655.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1165594
- 24.
Heisler MG, Ohno C, Das P, Sieber P, Reddy GV, Long JA, Meyerowitz EM. Patterns of auxin transport and gene expression during primordium development revealed by live imaging of the Arabidopsis inflorescence meristem. Current Biology. 2005;15:1899-1911.
Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2005.09.052
- 25.
Heller E, Kumar KV, Grill SW, Fuchs E. Forces generated by cell intercalation tow epidermal sheets in mammalian tissue morphogenesis. Developmental Cell. 2014;28:617-632.
Not in our library10.1016/j.devcel.2014.02.011
- 26.
Jönsson H, Gruel J, Krupinski P, Troein C. On evaluating models in computational morphodynamics. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2012;15:103-110.
Not in our library10.1016/j.pbi.2011.09.007
- 27.
Jönsson H, Heisler MG, Shapiro BE, Meyerowitz EM, Mjolsness E. An auxin-driven polarized transport model for phyllotaxis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA. 2006;103:1633-1638.
Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0509839103
- 28.
Kennaway R, Coen E, Green A, Bangham A. Generation of diverse biological forms through combinatorial interactions between tissue polarity and growth. PLOS Computational Biology. 2011;7:e1002071.
Not in our library10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002071
- 29.
Kierzkowski D, Lenhard M, Smith R, Kuhlemeier C. Interaction between meristem tissue layers controls phyllotaxis. Developmental Cell. 2013;26:616-628.
Not in our library10.1016/j.devcel.2013.08.017
- 30.
Kierzkowski D, Nakayama N, Routier-Kierzkowska A-L, Weber A, Bayer E, Schorderet M, Reinhardt D, Kuhlemeier C, Smith RS. Elastic domains regulate growth and organogenesis in the plant shoot apical meristem. Science. 2012;335:1096-1099.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1213100
- 31.
Kondo S, Miura T. Reaction-diffusion model as a framework for understanding biological pattern formation. Science. 2010;329:1616-1620.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1179047
- 32.
Kuchen EE, Fox S, de Reuille PB, Kennaway R, Bensmihen S, Avondo J, Calder GM, Southam P, Robinson S, Bangham A, Coen E. Generation of leaf shape through early patterns of growth and tissue polarity. Science. 2012;335:1092-1096.
Not in our library10.1126/science.1214678
- 33.
Kwiatkowska D. Surface growth at the reproductive shoot apex of Arabidopsis thaliana pin-formed 1 and wild type. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2004;55:1021-1032.
Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erh109
- 34.
Kwiatkowska D, Dumais J. Growth and morphogenesis at the vegetative shoot apex of Anagallis arvensis L. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2003;54:1585-1595.
Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erg166
- 35.
Kwiatkowska D, Routier-Kierzkowska AL. Morphogenesis at the inflorescence shoot apex of Anagallis arvensis: surface geometry and growth in comparison with the vegetative shoot. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2009;60:3407-3418.
Not in our library10.1093/jxb/erp176
- 36.
Lecuit T, Lenne PF. Cell surface mechanics and the control of cell shape, tissue patterns and morphogenesis. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2007;8:633-644.
Not in our library10.1038/nrm2222
- 37.
Levoy M. Efficient ray tracing of volume data. ACM Transactions on Graphics. 1990;9:245-261.
Not in our library10.1145/78964.78965
- 38.
Merks RM, Van de Peer Y, Inzé D, Beemster GT. Canalization without flux sensors: a traveling-wave hypothesis. Trends in Plant Science. 2007;12:384-390.
Not in our library10.1016/j.tplants.2007.08.004
- 39.
Milde F, Tauriello G, Haberkern H, Koumoutsakos P. SEM++: a particle model of cellular growth, signaling and migration. Computational Particle Mechanics. 2014;1:211-227.
Not in our library10.1007/s40571-014-0017-4
- 40.
Mosaliganti KR, Noche RR, Xiong F, Swinburne IA, Megason SG. ACME: automated cell morphology extractor for comprehensive reconstruction of cell membranes. PLOS Computational Biology. 2012;8:e1002780.
Not in our library10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002780
Cited by papers we hold 9
- Brassinosteroid gene regulatory networks at cellular resolution in the Arabidopsis root · 2023No notice
- Using positional information to provide context for biological image analysis with MorphoGraphX 2.0 · 2022No notice
- Organ geometry channels reproductive cell fate in the Arabidopsis ovule primordium · 2021Not checked
- Accurate and versatile 3D segmentation of plant tissues at cellular resolution · 2020No notice
- A Growth-Based Framework for Leaf Shape Development and Diversity · 2019No notice
- Why plants make puzzle cells, and how their shape emerges · 2018No notice
- A tension-adhesion feedback loop in plant epidermis · 2018Corrected
- Cell-size dependent progression of the cell cycle creates homeostasis and flexibility of plant cell size · 2017No notice
- Morphomechanical Innovation Drives Explosive Seed Dispersal · 2016No notice
Reads
Read by people on this page
None yet.
Checked or read by AI through naulon
None yet.
A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.
Are you an author?
Is this your paper?
Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.