Literature DB >> 21477410

Quality assurance testing for modern optical imaging systems.

Robert F Stack1, Carol J Bayles, Anne-Marie Girard, Karen Martin, Cynthia Opansky, Katherine Schulz, Richard W Cole.   

Abstract

The days of being able to ascertain instrument performance by simply peering through the eye pieces at a specimen are gone. However, users and granting agencies need to be confident that data collected on these instruments is uniform and quantifiable both over time and between instruments. Ideally, a LASER should not fluctuate, illumination should be completely uniform, and colors should be perfectly aligned. To check the current performance of imaging equipment, we conducted a worldwide research study utilizing three image-based tests: long-/short-term illumination stability, co-registration of signals across various wavelengths, and field illumination uniformity. To differentiate between "acceptable" and "unacceptable" performance, the deviation in illumination power could not exceed 10% (long term) or 3% (short term), the difference in the center-of-mass of imaged multicolored beads could not exceed >1 pixel between different wavelengths, and field illumination values could not exceed 10% (horizontal) or 20% (diagonal) deviation. This study established the current state of microscope performance through simple, efficient, and robust tests, while defining relative standards to assist cores in maintaining their instruments in optimal operating conditions. We developed cross-platform performance standards that will improve the validity of quantitative measurements made using various light microscopes.

Year:  2011        PMID: 21477410     DOI: 10.1017/S1431927611000237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microsc Microanal        ISSN: 1431-9276            Impact factor:   4.127


  14 in total

1.  A metric and workflow for quality control in the analysis of heterogeneity in phenotypic profiles and screens.

Authors:  Albert Gough; Tong Ying Shun; D Lansing Taylor; Mark Schurdak
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 3.608

2.  A Quantitative Measure of Field Illumination.

Authors:  Claire M Brown; Andrew Reilly; Richard W Cole
Journal:  J Biomol Tech       Date:  2015-07

3.  Digital images are data: and should be treated as such.

Authors:  Douglas W Cromey
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2013

4.  Calibration of wide-field deconvolution microscopy for quantitative fluorescence imaging.

Authors:  Ji-Sook Lee; Tse-Luen Erika Wee; Claire M Brown
Journal:  J Biomol Tech       Date:  2014-04

5.  Epi-fluorescence microscopy.

Authors:  Donna J Webb; Claire M Brown
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2013

Review 6.  A Review of the Scientific Rigor, Reproducibility, and Transparency Studies Conducted by the ABRF Research Groups.

Authors:  Sheenah M Mische; Nancy C Fisher; Susan M Meyn; Katia Sol-Church; Rebecca L Hegstad-Davies; Frances Weis-Garcia; Marie Adams; John M Ashton; Kym M Delventhal; Julie A Dragon; Laura Holmes; Pratik Jagtap; Kristopher E Kubow; Christopher E Mason; Magnus Palmblad; Brian C Searle; Christoph W Turck; Kevin L Knudtson
Journal:  J Biomol Tech       Date:  2020-04

7.  Fluorescence resonance energy transfer microscopy as demonstrated by measuring the activation of the serine/threonine kinase Akt.

Authors:  Joshua A Broussard; Benjamin Rappaz; Donna J Webb; Claire M Brown
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 13.491

8.  ConfocalCheck--a software tool for the automated monitoring of confocal microscope performance.

Authors:  Keng Imm Hng; Dirk Dormann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Tutorial: guidance for quantitative confocal microscopy.

Authors:  James Jonkman; Claire M Brown; Graham D Wright; Kurt I Anderson; Alison J North
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 10.  Best practices and tools for reporting reproducible fluorescence microscopy methods.

Authors:  Paula Montero Llopis; Rebecca A Senft; Tim J Ross-Elliott; Ryan Stephansky; Daniel P Keeley; Preman Koshar; Guillermo Marqués; Ya-Sheng Gao; Benjamin R Carlson; Thomas Pengo; Mark A Sanders; Lisa A Cameron; Michelle S Itano
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 28.547

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.