Technology

I just did a quick read of a fabulous position paper by Bartek Rajwa and my mentor Mario Roederer. Have a look! Lost in Translation: Harmonizing Terminology and Defining Mathematical Tools for Panel Optimization - Rajwa - Cytometry Part A - Wiley Online Library Some thoughts: In short, the thesis is that the community needs to be more exact in the terms that we use when developing panels. Bartek and Mario argue that currently used terms and approaches are mysterious and i

OK, getting on a soapbox here. I just want my data. For all of the standardization and formatting that the FCS file standard is providing, when I open files up in flow cytometry analysis software, a myriad of annoyances present themselves... variously, at one point or another: 1) parameters show up out of order 2) parameters aren't labeled with the reagent or dye 3) only the scatter parameters show up etc etc A skeptic might say, "maybe it's just a you issue" or "maybe it's

Last summer, I helped the folks at Biocompare build a buying guide for Flow Cytometers. It's not your typical advertising supplement. It's a true eBook with a focus on critical concepts, with great visualizations and clear writing, There is an insane table tht covers all the specs you could imagine; it's great reference material. Various vendors have provided excellent application notes, including: A 45-color PBMC panel A primer on panel design for an NK panel on a spectral

When Mario Roederer, Yolanda Mahnke, and I introduced a new type of scientific paper - the Optimized Multicolor Immunofluorescence Panels (OMIPs) - in 2010, we were crystal clear about the importance of, and need for, a systematic way to share the antibody panels we were creating, alongside the significant troubleshooting and optimization information we were generating. There are now 115 OMIPs (as of June 2025), covering a range of cell types and species. I am so proud of th

Many moons ago, when I wore a younger man's clothes, I developed a method to design panels based on spreading error. The principle was that you could calculate the contribution of each dye to spreading error in each detector, and use the channels with the lowest spreading error for the dimmest proteins in your panel. There was a very real advantage to the method; it had the highest probability of success for your particular instrument. Why? In those days, instruments varie

For a little more information, have a look at a 2018 review article I co-authored, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06214-0 , which has this summary chart including some technologies that I didn't include in parts I and II of this series:

In part I, we took a quick look at technologies that analyze plasma proteins, the most accessible, but noisiest and least informative about mechanism, amongst the sample types that we examine. Here, we quickly review technologies that examine cells. These are the technologies I grew up on, so they are fun to write about. An important note: This post focuses on technologies that study cells by the proteins they express. *Molecular cytometry is a generic term for CITE-Seq an

Do you remember multiple choice tests? The hardest questions offered options "d) some of the above" and "e) all of the above." But you never got an "it depends" option, at least until now. So, just like Jeopardy, here's the question answered by "it depends." Which technology is best for immune monitoring and biomarker discovery? Let's explore assays that study serum or plasma , in a simple and clear way, with a special focus on impact. I've color-coded the discussion points