Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (Print PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wilkins, M. F.
Right arrow Articles by Jonker, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Wilkins, M. F.
Right arrow Articles by Jonker, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press

A comparison of some neural and non-neural methods for identification of phytoplankton from flow cytomery data

Malcom F. Wilkins , Lynne Boddy , Colin W. Morris 1 and Richard Jonker 2

School of Pure and Applied Biology, University of Wales Cardiff CF1 3TL
1Department of Computer Studies, University of Glamorgan Treforest CF37 1DL, UK
22Department of Aquatic Ecology, University of Amsterdam Kruislaan 320, 1098 SM Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Four artifcial neural network paradigms (multilaver perceptron networks, learning vector quantization networks, and radial and asymmetric basis function networks) and two statistical methods (parametric statistical classification by modelling each class with Gaussian distributions, and non-parametric density estimation via the K-nearest neighbour method) were compared for their ability to identify seven freshwater and five marine phytoplankton species from flow cytometric data. Kohonen self-organizing maps were also used to examine similarities between species. Optimized networks and statistical methods performed similarly, correctly identifying between 86.8% and 90.1% of data from freshwater species, and between 81.3% and 84.1% of data from marine species. Choice of identification technique must therefore be made on the basis of other criteria. We highlight the way each method partitions the data space and thereby separates the data clusters, and discuss the relative merits of each with reference to complexity of data boundaries, training time, analysis time and behaviour when presented with ‘novel’ data.

Received on June 5, 1995; revised on October 3, 1995; accepted on October 3, 1995

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
M. F. Wilkins, L. Boddy, C. W. Morris, and R. R. Jonker
Identification of Phytoplankton from Flow Cytometry Data by Using Radial Basis Function Neural Networks
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., October 1, 1999; 65(10): 4404 - 4410.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.