More Like this

1. Genotype and phenotype data standardization, utilization and integration in the big data era for agricultural sciences

   https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baad088  

   Deng, Cecilia H ; Naithani, Sushma ; Kumari, Sunita ; Cobo-Simón, Irene ; Quezada-Rodríguez, Elsa H ; Skrabisova, Maria ; Gladman, Nick ; Correll, Melanie J ; Sikiru, Akeem Babatunde ; Afuwape, Olusola O ; et al ( January 2023 , Database)

   Large-scale genotype and phenotype data have been increasingly generated to identify genetic markers, understand gene function and evolution and facilitate genomic selection. These datasets hold immense value for both current and future studies, as they are vital for crop breeding, yield improvement and overall agricultural sustainability. However, integrating these datasets from heterogeneous sources presents significant challenges and hinders their effective utilization. We established the Genotype-Phenotype Working Group in November 2021 as a part of the AgBioData Consortium (https://www.agbiodata.org) to review current data types and resources that support archiving, analysis and visualization of genotype and phenotype data to understand the needs and challenges of the plant genomic research community. For 2021–22, we identified different types of datasets and examined metadata annotations related to experimental design/methods/sample collection, etc. Furthermore, we thoroughly reviewed publicly funded repositories for raw and processed data as well as secondary databases and knowledgebases that enable the integration of heterogeneous data in the context of the genome browser, pathway networks and tissue-specific gene expression. Based on our survey, we recommend a need for (i) additional infrastructural support for archiving many new data types, (ii) development of community standards for data annotation and formatting, (iii) resources for biocuration and (iv) analysis and visualization tools to connect genotype data with phenotype data to enhance knowledge synthesis and to foster translational research. Although this paper only covers the data and resources relevant to the plant research community, we expect that similar issues and needs are shared by researchers working on animals.

   Database URL: https://www.agbiodata.org.

    

   more » « less
2. The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus: The Breast Tissue Subset

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB52430.2021.9672275  

   Wevodau, Z. ; Doshna, B. ; Jhala, N. ; Akhtar, I. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2021 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, I. (Ed.)

   The Neural Engineering Data Consortium (NEDC) is developing the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus (TUDP), an open source database of high-resolution images from scanned pathology samples [1], as part of its National Science Foundation-funded Major Research Instrumentation grant titled “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning” [2]. The long-term goal of this project is to release one million images. We have currently scanned over 100,000 images and are in the process of annotating breast tissue data for our first official corpus release, v1.0.0. This release contains 3,505 annotated images of breast tissue including 74 patients with cancerous diagnoses (out of a total of 296 patients). In this poster, we will present an analysis of this corpus and discuss the challenges we have faced in efficiently producing high quality annotations of breast tissue. It is well known that state of the art algorithms in machine learning require vast amounts of data. Fields such as speech recognition [3], image recognition [4] and text processing [5] are able to deliver impressive performance with complex deep learning models because they have developed large corpora to support training of extremely high-dimensional models (e.g., billions of parameters). Other fields that do not have access to such data resources must rely on techniques in which existing models can be adapted to new datasets [6]. A preliminary version of this breast corpus release was tested in a pilot study using a baseline machine learning system, ResNet18 [7], that leverages several open-source Python tools. The pilot corpus was divided into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Portions of these slides were manually annotated [1] using the nine labels in Table 1 [8] to identify five to ten examples of pathological features on each slide. Not every pathological feature is annotated, meaning excluded areas can include focuses particular to these labels that are not used for training. A summary of the number of patches within each label is given in Table 2. To maintain a balanced training set, 1,000 patches of each label were used to train the machine learning model. Throughout all sets, only annotated patches were involved in model development. The performance of this model in identifying all the patches in the evaluation set can be seen in the confusion matrix of classification accuracy in Table 3. The highest performing labels were background, 97% correct identification, and artifact, 76% correct identification. A correlation exists between labels with more than 6,000 development patches and accurate performance on the evaluation set. Additionally, these results indicated a need to further refine the annotation of invasive ductal carcinoma (“indc”), inflammation (“infl”), nonneoplastic features (“nneo”), normal (“norm”) and suspicious (“susp”). This pilot experiment motivated changes to the corpus that will be discussed in detail in this poster presentation. To increase the accuracy of the machine learning model, we modified how we addressed underperforming labels. One common source of error arose with how non-background labels were converted into patches. Large areas of background within other labels were isolated within a patch resulting in connective tissue misrepresenting a non-background label. In response, the annotation overlay margins were revised to exclude benign connective tissue in non-background labels. Corresponding patient reports and supporting immunohistochemical stains further guided annotation reviews. The microscopic diagnoses given by the primary pathologist in these reports detail the pathological findings within each tissue site, but not within each specific slide. The microscopic diagnoses informed revisions specifically targeting annotated regions classified as cancerous, ensuring that the labels “indc” and “dcis” were used only in situations where a micropathologist diagnosed it as such. Further differentiation of cancerous and precancerous labels, as well as the location of their focus on a slide, could be accomplished with supplemental immunohistochemically (IHC) stained slides. When distinguishing whether a focus is a nonneoplastic feature versus a cancerous growth, pathologists employ antigen targeting stains to the tissue in question to confirm the diagnosis. For example, a nonneoplastic feature of usual ductal hyperplasia will display diffuse staining for cytokeratin 5 (CK5) and no diffuse staining for estrogen receptor (ER), while a cancerous growth of ductal carcinoma in situ will have negative or focally positive staining for CK5 and diffuse staining for ER [9]. Many tissue samples contain cancerous and non-cancerous features with morphological overlaps that cause variability between annotators. The informative fields IHC slides provide could play an integral role in machine model pathology diagnostics. Following the revisions made on all the annotations, a second experiment was run using ResNet18. Compared to the pilot study, an increase of model prediction accuracy was seen for the labels indc, infl, nneo, norm, and null. This increase is correlated with an increase in annotated area and annotation accuracy. Model performance in identifying the suspicious label decreased by 25% due to the decrease of 57% in the total annotated area described by this label. A summary of the model performance is given in Table 4, which shows the new prediction accuracy and the absolute change in error rate compared to Table 3. The breast tissue subset we are developing includes 3,505 annotated breast pathology slides from 296 patients. The average size of a scanned SVS file is 363 MB. The annotations are stored in an XML format. A CSV version of the annotation file is also available which provides a flat, or simple, annotation that is easy for machine learning researchers to access and interface to their systems. Each patient is identified by an anonymized medical reference number. Within each patient’s directory, one or more sessions are identified, also anonymized to the first of the month in which the sample was taken. These sessions are broken into groupings of tissue taken on that date (in this case, breast tissue). A deidentified patient report stored as a flat text file is also available. Within these slides there are a total of 16,971 total annotated regions with an average of 4.84 annotations per slide. Among those annotations, 8,035 are non-cancerous (normal, background, null, and artifact,) 6,222 are carcinogenic signs (inflammation, nonneoplastic and suspicious,) and 2,714 are cancerous labels (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma in situ.) The individual patients are split up into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Of the 74 cancerous patients, 20 were allotted for both the development and evaluation sets, while the remain 34 were allotted for train. The remaining 222 patients were split up to preserve the overall distribution of labels within the corpus. This was done in hope of creating control sets for comparable studies. Overall, the development and evaluation sets each have 80 patients, while the training set has 136 patients. In a related component of this project, slides from the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Biosample Repository (https://www.foxchase.org/research/facilities/genetic-research-facilities/biosample-repository -facility) are being digitized in addition to slides provided by Temple University Hospital. This data includes 18 different types of tissue including approximately 38.5% urinary tissue and 16.5% gynecological tissue. These slides and the metadata provided with them are already anonymized and include diagnoses in a spreadsheet with sample and patient ID. We plan to release over 13,000 unannotated slides from the FCCC Corpus simultaneously with v1.0.0 of TUDP. Details of this release will also be discussed in this poster. Few digitally annotated databases of pathology samples like TUDP exist due to the extensive data collection and processing required. The breast corpus subset should be released by November 2021. By December 2021 we should also release the unannotated FCCC data. We are currently annotating urinary tract data as well. We expect to release about 5,600 processed TUH slides in this subset. We have an additional 53,000 unprocessed TUH slides digitized. Corpora of this size will stimulate the development of a new generation of deep learning technology. In clinical settings where resources are limited, an assistive diagnoses model could support pathologists’ workload and even help prioritize suspected cancerous cases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grants nos. CNS-1726188 and 1925494. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. REFERENCES [1] N. Shawki et al., “The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York City, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 67 104. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030368432. [2] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning.” Major Research Instrumentation (MRI), Division of Computer and Network Systems, Award No. 1726188, January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2021. https://www. isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_dpath/. [3] A. Gulati et al., “Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognition,” in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH), 2020, pp. 5036-5040. https://doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2020-3015. [4] C.-J. Wu et al., “Machine Learning at Facebook: Understanding Inference at the Edge,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2019, pp. 331–344. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8675201. [5] I. Caswell and B. Liang, “Recent Advances in Google Translate,” Google AI Blog: The latest from Google Research, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/06/recent-advances-in-google-translate.html. [Accessed: 01-Aug-2021]. [6] V. Khalkhali, N. Shawki, V. Shah, M. Golmohammadi, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Low Latency Real-Time Seizure Detection Using Transfer Deep Learning,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2021, pp. 1 7. https://www.isip. piconepress.com/publications/conference_proceedings/2021/ieee_spmb/eeg_transfer_learning/. [7] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning,” Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2020. https://www.isip.piconepress.com/publications/reports/2020/nsf/mri_dpath/. [8] I. Hunt, S. Husain, J. Simons, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Recent Advances in the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2019, pp. 1–4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9037859. [9] A. P. Martinez, C. Cohen, K. Z. Hanley, and X. (Bill) Li, “Estrogen Receptor and Cytokeratin 5 Are Reliable Markers to Separate Usual Ductal Hyperplasia From Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ,” Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., vol. 140, no. 7, pp. 686–689, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2015-0238-OA. 

   more » « less
3. The future of legume genetic data resources: Challenges, opportunities, and priorities

   https://doi.org/10.1002/leg3.16  

   Bauchet, Guillaume J. ; Bett, Kirstin E. ; Cameron, Connor T. ; Campbell, Jacqueline D. ; Cannon, Ethalinda K. S. ; Cannon, Steven B. ; Carlson, Joseph W. ; Chan, Agnes ; Cleary, Alan ; Close, Timothy J. ; et al ( November 2019 , Legume Science)

   Legumes, comprising one of the largest, most diverse, and most economically important plant families, are the subject of vibrant research and development worldwide. Continued improvement of legume crops will benefit from the recent proliferation of genetic (including genomic) resources; but the diversity, scale, and complexity of these resources presents challenges to those managing and using them. A workshop held in March of 2019 addressed questions of data resources and priorities for the legumes. The workshop identified various needs and recommendations: (a) Develop strategies to effectively store, integrate, and relate genetic resources collected in different projects. (b) Leverage information collected across many legume species by standardizing data formats and ontologies, improving the state of metadata about datasets, and increasing use of the FAIR data principles. (c) Advocate for the critical role that curators exercise in integrating complex datasets into databases and adding high value metadata that enable downstream analytics and facilitate practical applications. (d) Implement standardized software and database development practices to best leverage limited developer time and expertise gained from the various legume (and other) species. (e) Develop tools and databases that can manage genetic information for the world's plant genetic resources, enabling efficient incorporation of important traits into breeding programs. (f) Centralize information on databases, tools, and training materials and establish funding streams to support training and outreach.

    

   more » « less
4. Planteome 2024 Update: Reference Ontologies and Knowledgebase for Plant Biology

   https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkad1028  

   Cooper, Laurel ; Elser, Justin ; Laporte, Marie-Angelique ; Arnaud, Elizabeth ; Jaiswal, Pankaj ( December 2023 , Nucleic Acids Research)

   The Planteome project (https://planteome.org/) provides a suite of reference and crop-specific ontologies and an integrated knowledgebase of plant genomics data. The plant genomics data in the Planteome has been obtained through manual and automated curation and sourced from more than 40 partner databases and resources. Here, we report on updates to the Planteome reference ontologies, namely, the Plant Ontology (PO), Trait Ontology (TO), the Plant Experimental Conditions Ontology (PECO), and integration of species/crop-specific vocabularies from our partners, the Crop Ontology (CO) into the TO ontology graph. Currently, 11 CO vocabularies are integrated into the Planteome with the addition of yam, sorghum, and potato since 2018. In addition, the size of the annotation database has increased by 34%, and the number of bioentities (genes, proteins, etc.) from 125 plant taxa has increased by 72%. We developed new tools to facilitate user requests and improvements to the CO vocabularies, and to allow fast searching and browsing of PO terms and definitions. These enhancements and future changes to automate the TO-CO mappings and knowledge discovery tools ensure that the Planteome will continue to be a valuable resource for plant biology.

    

   more » « less
5. An Extensible Ontology Modeling Approach Using Post Coordinated Expressions for Semantic Provenance in Biomedical Research

   https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69459-7_23  

   Valdez, J. ( October 2017 , On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems. OTM 2017 Conferences. OTM 2017.)

   Provenance metadata describing the source or origin of data is critical to verify and validate results of scientific experiments. Indeed, reproducibility of scientific studies is rapidly gaining significant attention in the research community, for example biomedical and healthcare research. To address this challenge in the biomedical research domain, we have developed the Provenance for Clinical and Healthcare Research (ProvCaRe) using World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) PROV specifications, including the PROV Ontology (PROV-O). In the ProvCaRe project, we are extending PROV-O to create a formal model of provenance information that is necessary for scientific reproducibility and replication in biomedical research. However, there are several challenges associated with the development of the ProvCaRe ontology, including: (1) Ontology engineering: modeling all biomedical provenance-related terms in an ontology has undefined scope and is not feasible before the release of the ontology; (2) Redundancy: there are a large number of existing biomedical ontologies that already model relevant biomedical terms; and (3) Ontology maintenance: adding or deleting terms from a large ontology is error prone and it will be difficult to maintain the ontology over time. Therefore, in contrast to modeling all classes and properties in an ontology before deployment (also called precoordination), we propose the “ProvCaRe Compositional Grammar Syntax” to model ontology classes on-demand (also called postcoordination). The compositional grammar syntax allows us to re-use existing biomedical ontology classes and compose provenance-specific terms that extend PROV-O classes and properties. We demonstrate the application of this approach in the ProvCaRe ontology and the use of the ontology in the development of the ProvCaRe knowledgebase that consists of more than 38 million provenance triples automatically extracted from 384,802 published research articles using a text processing workflow. 

   more » « less