Applying the Automated EM Pipeline: One quarter of a million - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

applying the automated em pipeline one quarter of a
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Applying the Automated EM Pipeline: One quarter of a million - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Applying the Automated EM Pipeline: One quarter of a million particles of GroEL per day Or what do I do with all these data? Outline What are the steps one takes to use automation in practice? What are the obstacles one encounters


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Applying the Automated EM Pipeline: One quarter of a million particles

  • f GroEL per day

Or what do I do with all these data?

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline

  • What are the steps one takes to use

automation in practice?

  • What are the obstacles one encounters

along the way to a reconstruction?

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Recons truction pipeline

  • Data Acquisition

– Leginon

  • Particle picking

– Selexon

  • CTF estimation

– ACE

  • Selecting “good” data

– Database queries – ???

  • Reconstruction
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Background

  • GroEL has been our driver for developing both

automated data collection and automated data analysis

  • 150,000 particles/24 hours a year ago
  • Over the last year, led to the development of

– Environment monitoring – Database reports – Training data for ACE – Optimize protocols for single particle reconstruction with EMAN and Frealign – Creation of JAHCs grids

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Data Acquis ition

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Automated data acquis ition with Leginon

Suloway et al. (2005) J. Struct. Biol., In press.

Multis cale Imaging Automated micros cope control

slide-7
SLIDE 7

How long does it take?

  • Setup

– 1 h on a good day - 5 h on a bad day

  • Stability of

microscope/problems with specimen

  • Acquisition

– Creating the atlas

  • 15 min

– Finding holes

  • ~30s for square image
  • < 1s for hole image

– Focusing

  • 10s for algorithm + 5-30s for

melting ice

– Reading and correcting the high-resolution exposures

  • ~30s / exposure
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Image collection s tatis tics

  • Defocus pairs: 552

– 50,000X, 2.263 Å/pix, -0.8 to -2.0 µm defocus – Hundreds of particles per image

  • Focus images: 273

– 50,000X

  • Holes visited: 318

– 5000X, 179 Å/pix, -150 µm defocus

  • Squares visited: 32

– 800X, 558 Å/pix, -2mm defocus

  • Total time: 25h
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Picking particles

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Automated particle picking

Selexon

~95% accurate

Roseman (2004) JSB, 145 Zhu et al. (2004) IEEE ISBI04 conference

280,000 particles picked

slide-11
SLIDE 11

How long does it take?

  • Setup

– Creating templates

  • 1-2 hours

– Setting parameters

  • 30 min
  • Automated particle picking

– ~2 min/micrograph

slide-12
SLIDE 12

CTF Es timation

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Automated CTF es timation

ACE

Mallick et al. (2005) Ultramicroscopy,104

slide-14
SLIDE 14

ACEMAN

  • Reads Imagic stacks instead of entire

micrographs

  • Uses EMAN formulation for noise and

envelope

  • So far does not include structure factors

– Structure factors should be implemented w/i a month

slide-15
SLIDE 15

ACEMAN

slide-16
SLIDE 16

How long does it take?

  • Setup

– 1 minute

  • Automated CTF estimation

– ~1 minute/micrograph – Slightly faster with ACEMAN

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Databas e reports

http://cronus3.scripps.edu/dbem/summary.php?expId=1933

slide-18
SLIDE 18

The bottom line: How do thes e parameters affect the recons truction?

  • Can we sort the data in such a way that

we focus only on “good” particles?

– Sort by ice thickness – Sort by ACE data – Sort by drift – Sort by temperature – ???

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Sorting particles by ice thicknes s

  • Sorting scheme

– Throw away any micrograph with ACE confidence value < 0.8 (manually verified that all fits > 0.8 are correct) – Take defocus measurements from ACE and sort micrographs into small (0.5-1.0), medium (1.0-1.5), and large (1.5-3.0) defocus sets – Sort defocus sets and split into 10 subsets by increasing ice thickness – Find set with least ptcls and randomly remove ptcls from

  • ther sets until all have same # ptcls (~15,800)
  • Result is 10 sets of particles with equivalent range of

defoci

  • Reconstruct each set using EMAN
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Res

  • lution decreas

es with increas ing ice thicknes s

Resolution vs. Ice thickness

y = 5.9957x + 8.8168 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 10 10.1 10.2 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22 Ice thickness (K* ln I/I0)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

FSC of highes t res

  • lution

s tructure

Resolution = 9.3Å

slide-22
SLIDE 22

The s tructure of GroEL

Thinnest ice structure Amplitude corrected via Spider

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Sorting particles by ice thicknes s

  • amp. corrected
  • Sorting scheme

– Use ACEMAN to estimate noise and envelope, but use original ACE estimation for defocus – Throw away any micrograph with ACE confidence value < 0.8 – Take defocus measurements from ACE and sort micrographs into small (0.5-1.0), medium (1.0-1.5), and large (1.5-3.0) defocus sets – Sort defocus sets and split into 10 subsets by increasing ice thickness – Find set with least ptcls and randomly remove ptcls from other sets until all have same # ptcls (~15,800)

  • Result is 10 sets of particles with equivalent range of defoci
  • Reconstruct each set using EMAN

– Apply envelope correction to class averages towards the end of the refinement

slide-24
SLIDE 24

FSC of thinnes t ice

Resolution = 6.5Å Nyquist = 4.526Å

slide-25
SLIDE 25

GroEL at 6.5Å?

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Can we get even higher res

  • lution?
  • Refine with all 280,000 ptcls
  • Average volumes from multiple

reconstructions

  • What do we do about amplitudes?
  • What is the resolution?!!!
slide-27
SLIDE 27

Average of all volumes

Volume was amplitude corrected via Spider

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Average of all volumes

QuickTime™ and a H.264 decompressor are needed to see this picture.

slide-29
SLIDE 29

What is the res

  • lution?

Resolution (FSC0.5) = 10.2Å

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Comparis

  • n with 6.5Å

6.5Å? 10.2Å?

Amplitude corrected during refinement Average of 10 volumes

slide-31
SLIDE 31

The pipeline in action

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Acknowledgments

  • Leginon

– Denis Fellman – Jim Pulokas – Christian Suloway – Joel Quispe – Anchi Cheng

  • ACE

– Satya Mallick

  • Selexon

– Yuanxin Zhu – Alan Roseman