Cited by 957Cell Image Analysis TechniquesCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentDigital Imaging for Blood Diseases

Automatic measurement of sister chromatid exchange frequency.

Open access
Zack, G W, Rogers, W E, Latt, S A·1977·Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry

Abstract

An automatic system for detecting and counting sister chromatid exchanges in human chromosomes has been developed. Metaphase chromosomes from lymphocytes which had incorporated 5-bromodeoxyuridine for two replication cycles were treated with the dye 33258 Hoechst and photodegraded so that the sister chromatids exhibited differential Giemsa staining. A computer-controlled television-microscope system was used to acquire digitized metaphase spread images by direct scanning of microscope slides. Individual objects in the images were identified by a thresholding procedure. The probability that each object was a single, separate chromosome was estimated from size and shape measurements. An analysis of the spatial relationships of the dark-chromatid regions of each object yielded a set of possible exchange locations and estimated probabilities that such locations corresponded to sister chromatid exchanges. A normalized estimate of the sister chromatid exchange frequency was obtained by summing the joint probabilities that a location contained an exchange within a single, separate chromosome over the set of chromosomes from one or more cells and dividing by the expected value of the total chromosome area analyzed. Comparison with manual scoring of exchanges showed satisfactory agreement up to levels of approximately 30 sister chromatid exchanges/cell, or slightly more than twice control levels. The processing time for this automated sister chromatid exchange detection system was comparable to that of manual scoring.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/25.7.70454

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zack, G. W., Rogers, W. E., & Latt, S. A.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry
Published
1977-07
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
741-753
ISSN
  • 0022-1554 (ISSN-L)
  • 1551-5044
OpenAlex
W2170249894
Cited by
957
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 25
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • March of Dimes Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Cell Image Analysis Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Imaging for Blood Diseases
Keywords
sister chromatid exchange, automated detection, metaphase chromosomes, lymphocytes, bromodeoxyuridine, photodegradation, Giemsa staining, Hoechst 33258, binarization, computer vision, chromosome identification, chromosomal instability
MeSH terms
Autoanalysis, Azure Stains, Chromatids, Computers, Crossing Over, Genetic, Cytological Techniques, Bisbenzimidazole, Humans, Microscopy, Mitomycins, Television

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review