Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-04T10:37:25.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Segmentation Approach Towards Phase-Contrast Microscopic Images of Activated Sludge to Monitor the Wastewater Treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2017

Muhammad Burhan Khan ,
Humaira Nisar ,
Choon Aun Ng ,
Kim Ho Yeap  and
Koon Chun Lai
Muhammad Burhan Khan
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar, Perak 31900, Malaysia
Humaira Nisar*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar, Perak 31900, Malaysia
Choon Aun Ng
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar, Perak 31900, Malaysia
Kim Ho Yeap
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar, Perak 31900, Malaysia
Koon Chun Lai
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kampar, Perak 31900, Malaysia
*
*Corresponding Author. humaira@utar.edu.my
Get access

Abstract

Image processing and analysis is an effective tool for monitoring and fault diagnosis of activated sludge (AS) wastewater treatment plants. The AS image comprise of flocs (microbial aggregates) and filamentous bacteria. In this paper, nine different approaches are proposed for image segmentation of phase-contrast microscopic (PCM) images of AS samples. The proposed strategies are assessed for their effectiveness from the perspective of microscopic artifacts associated with PCM. The first approach uses an algorithm that is based on the idea that different color space representation of images other than red-green-blue may have better contrast. The second uses an edge detection approach. The third strategy, employs a clustering algorithm for the segmentation and the fourth applies local adaptive thresholding. The fifth technique is based on texture-based segmentation and the sixth uses watershed algorithm. The seventh adopts a split-and-merge approach. The eighth employs Kittler’s thresholding. Finally, the ninth uses a top-hat and bottom-hat filtering-based technique. The approaches are assessed, and analyzed critically with reference to the artifacts of PCM. Gold approximations of ground truth images are prepared to assess the segmentations. Overall, the edge detection-based approach exhibits the best results in terms of accuracy, and the texture-based algorithm in terms of false negative ratio. The respective scenarios are explained for suitability of edge detection and texture-based algorithms.

Keywords

phase-contrast microscopyactivated sludgeimage segmentationsegmentation assessmentfilamentous bacteria
Type
Instrumentation and Software
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 23 , Issue 6 , December 2017 , pp. 1130 - 1142
Copyright
© Microscopy Society of America 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amaral, A.L., Mesquita, D.P. & Ferreira, E.C. (2013). Automatic identification of activated sludge disturbances and assessment of operational parameters. Chemosphere 91, 705–710.Google Scholar
Bitton, G. (2005). Wastewater Microbiology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
Boztoprak, H., Özbay, Y., Güçlü, D. & Küçükhemek, M. (2015). Prediction of sludge volume index bulking using image analysis and neural network at a full-scale activated sludge plant. Desalination and Water Treatment 57, 17195–17205.Google Scholar
Bradhurst, C.J., Boles, W. & Xiao, Y. (2008). Segmentation of Bone Marrow Stromal Cells in Phase Contrast Microscopy Images. In 23rd International Conference Image and Vision Computing, pp. 1–6. Christchurch, New Zealand: IEEE.Google Scholar
Cai, H., Yang, Z., Cao, X., Xia, W. & Xu, X. (2014). A new iterative triclass thresholding technique in image segmentation. IEEE Trans Image Process 23, 1038–1046.Google Scholar
Cenens, C., Van Beurden, K.P., Jenné, R. & Van Impe, J.F. (2002). On the development of a novel image analysis technique to distinguish between flocs and filaments in activated sludge images. Water Sci Technol 46, 381–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Das, K., Majumder, A., Siegenthaler, M., Keirstead, H. & Gopi, M. (2011). Automated cell classification and visualization for analyzing remyelination therapy. Visual Comput 27, 1055–1069.Google Scholar
Debeir, O., Adanja, I., Warzée, N., Van Ham, P. & Decaestecker, C. (2008). Phase Contrast Image Segmentation by Weak Watershed Transform Assembly. In 5th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: from Nano to Macro. pp. 724–727. Paris, France: IEEE.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, R.C., Woods, R.L. & Eddins, S.L. (2010). Digital Image Processing Using MATLAB. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Education.Google Scholar
Jaccard, N., Griffin, L.D., Keser, A., Macown, R.J., Super, A., Veraitch, F.S. & Szita, N. (2014). Automated method for the rapid and precise estimation of adherent cell culture characteristics from phase contrast microscopy images. Biotechnol Bioeng 111, 504–517.Google Scholar
Jenkins, D., Richard, M.G. & Daigger, G.T. (2003). Manual on the Causes and Control of Activated Sludge Bulking, Foaming, and Other Solids Separation Problems. Hoboken, NJ: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Jenné, R., Banadda, E.N., Smets, I., Deurinck, J. & Impe, J. (2007). Detection of filamentous bulking problems: developing an image analysis system for sludge composition monitoring. Microsc Microanal 13, 36–41.Google Scholar
Juneau, P.-M., Garnier, A. & Duchesne, C. (2013). Selection and tuning of a fast and simple phase-contrast microscopy image segmentation algorithm for measuring myoblast growth kinetics in an automated manner. Microsc Microanal 19, 855–866.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Lee, X.Y., Nisar, H., Ng, C.A., Yeap, K.H. & Malik, A.S. (2015 a). Digital image processing and analysis for activated sludge wastewater treatment. Adv Exp Med Biol 823, 227–248.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Nisar, H., Ng, C.A. & Lo, P.K. (2016). Estimation of sludge volume index (SVI) using bright field activated sludge images. In IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference, vol. I, pp. 407–411. Taipei, Taiwan: IEEE.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Nisar, H., Ng, C.A., Lo, P.K. & Yap, V.V. (2015 b). Local adaptive approach toward segmentation of microscopic images of activated sludge flocs. J Electron Imaging 24, 61102.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Nisar, H., Ng, C.A., Lo, P.K. & Yap, V.V. (2017). Generalized classification modeling of activated sludge process based on microscopic image analysis. Environ Technol 39, 24–34.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Nisar, H., Ng, C.A., Salih, Y. & Malik, A.S. (2014). Segmentation assessment of activated sludge flocs at different magnifications for wastewater treatment. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Control System, Computing and Engineering (ICCSCE), pp. 592–596. Penang, Malaysia: IEEE.Google Scholar
Kittler, J. & Illingworth, J. (1986). Minimum error thresholding. Pattern Recognit 19, 41–47.Google Scholar
Kulkarni, S. (ed.) 2012). Machine Learning Algorithms for Problem Solving in Computational Applications: Intelligent Techniques. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
Lee, X.Y., Khan, M.B., Nisar, H., Ho, Y.K., Ng, C.A. & Malik, A.S. (2014). Morphological analysis of activated sludge flocs and filaments. In IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference, pp. 1449–1453. Montevideo, Uruguay: IEEE.Google Scholar
Lloyd, S. (1982). Least squares quantization in PCM. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 28, 129–137.Google Scholar
The MathWorks, INC. (2015). MATLAB 8.5 R2015A. Natick, MA: The MathWorks, Inc.Google Scholar
Mesquita, D.P., Amaral, A.L. & Fareira, E.C. (2013). Activated sludge characterization through microscopy: A review on quantitative image analysis and chemometric techniques. Anal Chim Acta 802, 14–28.Google Scholar
Mesquita, D.P., Amaral, A.L. & Ferreira, E.C. (2016). Estimation of effluent quality parameters from an activated sludge system using quantitative image analysis. Chem Eng J 285, 349–357.Google Scholar
Mesquita, D.P., Dias, O., Amaral, A.L. & Ferreira, E.C. (2010). A comparison between bright field and phase-contrast image analysis techniques in activated sludge morphological characterization. Microsc Microanal 16, 166–174.Google Scholar
Meyer, F. (1994). Topographic distance and watershed lines. Signal Process 38, 113–125.Google Scholar
Otsu, N. (1979). A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9, 62–66.Google Scholar
Pang, J., Özkucur, N., Ren, M., Kaplan, D.L., Levin, M. & Miller, E.L. (2015). Automatic neuron segmentation and neural network analysis method for phase contrast microscopy images. Biomed Opt Express 6, 4395–4416.Google Scholar
Rand, W.M. (1971). Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. J Am Stat Assoc 66, 846–850.Google Scholar
Shanmugavadivu, P., Sivakumar, V. & Sudhir, R. (2016). Fractal dimension-bound spatio-temporal analysis of digital mammograms. Eur Phys J Spec Top 225, 137–146.Google Scholar
Siddiqi, K., Lauziere, Y.B., Tannenbaum, A. & Zucker, S.W. (1998). Area and length minimizing flows for shape segmentation. IEEE Trans Image Process 7, 433–443.Google Scholar
Su, H., Yin, Z., Huh, S. & Kanade, T. (2013). Cell segmentation in phase contrast microscopy images via semi-supervised classification over optics-related features. Med Image Anal 17, 746–765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Topman, G., Sharabani-Yosef, O. & Gefen, A. (2011). A method for quick, low-cost automated confluency measurements. Microsc Microanal 17, 915–922.Google Scholar
Yin, Z., Kanade, T. & Chen, M. (2016). Understanding the phase contrast optics to restore artifact-free microscopy images for segmentation. Med Image Anal 16, 1047–1062.Google Scholar