Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (3)
- Buchkapitel (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (4)
Schlagworte
- Biology (1)
- Comparability (1)
- Data (1)
- Existing structures (1)
- Filter (1)
- Fluorescence (1)
- Imaging (1)
- Life science (1)
- MOF (1)
- Medicine (1)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
A modern day light microscope has evolved from a tool devoted to making primarily empirical observations to what is now a sophisticated, quantitative device that is an integral part of both physical and life science research. Nowadays, microscopes are found in nearly every experimental laboratory. However, despite their prevalent use in capturing and quantifying scientific phenomena, neither a thorough understanding of the principles underlying quantitative imaging techniques nor appropriate knowledge of how to calibrate, operate and maintain microscopes can be taken for granted. This is clearly demonstrated by the well-documented and widespread difficulties that are routinely encountered in evaluating acquired data and reproducing scientific experiments. Indeed, studies have shown that more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to repeat another scientist’s experiments, while more than half have even failed to reproduce their own experiments1. One factor behind the reproducibility crisis of experiments published in scientific journals is the frequent underreporting of imaging methods caused by a lack of awareness and/or a lack of knowledge of the applied technique2,3. Whereas quality control procedures for some methods used in biomedical research, such as genomics (e.g., DNA sequencing, RNA-seq) or cytometry, have been introduced (e.g. ENCODE4), this issue has not been tackled for optical microscopy instrumentation and images. Although many calibration standards and protocols have been published, there is a lack of awareness and agreement on common Standards and guidelines for quality assessment and reproducibility5.
In April 2020, the QUality Assessment and REProducibility for instruments and images in Light Microscopy (QUAREP-LiMi) initiative6 was formed. This initiative comprises imaging scientists from academia and industry who share a common interest in achieving a better understanding of the performance and limitations of microscopes and improved quality control (QC) in light microscopy. The ultimate goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to establish a set of common QC standards, guidelines, metadata models7,8, and tools9,10, including detailed protocols, with the ultimate aim of improving reproducible advances in scientific research.
This White Paper 1) summarizes the major obstacles identified in the field that motivated the launch of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative; 2) identifies the urgent need to address these obstacles in a grassroots manner, through a community of Stakeholders including, researchers, imaging scientists11, bioimage analysts, bioimage informatics developers, corporate partners, Funding agencies, standards organizations, scientific publishers, and observers of such; 3) outlines the current actions of the QUAREPLiMi initiative, and 4) proposes future steps that can be taken to improve the dissemination and acceptance of the proposed guidelines to manage QC.
To summarize, the principal goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to improve the overall quality and reproducibility of light microscope image data by introducing broadly accepted standard practices and accurately captured image data metrics.
Under the auspices of the Organic Analysis Working Group (OAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) a key comparison, CCQM K55.b, was coordinated by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) in 2010/2011. Nineteen national measurement institutes and the BIPM participated. Participants were required to assign the mass fraction of aldrin present as the main component in the comparison sample for CCQM-K55.b which consisted of technical grade aldrin obtained from the National Measurement Institute Australia that had been subject to serial recrystallization and drying prior to sub-division into the units supplied for the comparison.
Aldrin was selected to be representative of the performance of a laboratory's measurement capability for the purity assignment of organic compounds of medium structural complexity [molar mass range 300 Da to 500 Da] and low polarity (pKOW < -2) for which related structure impurities can be quantified by capillary gas phase chromatography (GC).
The key comparison reference value (KCRV) for the aldrin content of the material was 950.8 mg/g with a combined standard uncertainty of 0.85 mg/g. The KCRV was assigned by combination of KCRVs assigned by consensus from participant results for each orthogonal impurity class. The relative expanded uncertainties reported by laboratories having results consistent with the KCRV ranged from 0.3% to 0.6% using a mass balance approach and 0.5% to 1% using a qNMR method.
The major analytical challenge posed by the material proved to be the detection and quantification of a significant amount of oligomeric organic material within the sample and most participants relying on a mass balance approach displayed a positive bias relative to the KCRV (overestimation of aldrin content) in excess of 10 mg/g due to not having adequate procedures in place to detect and quantify the non-volatile content–specifically the non-volatile organics content–of the comparison sample.
There was in general excellent agreement between participants in the identification and the quantification of the total and individual related structure impurities, water content and the residual solvent content of the sample.
The comparison demonstrated the utility of 1H NMR as an independent method for quantitative analysis of high purity compounds. In discussion of the participant results it was noted that while several had access to qNMR estimates for the aldrin content that were inconsistent with their mass balance determination they decided to accept the mass balance result and assumed a hidden bias in their NMR data. By contrast, laboratories that placed greater confidence in their qNMR result were able to resolve the discrepancy through additional studies that provided evidence of the presence of non-volatile organic impurity at the requisite level to bring their mass balance and qNMR estimates into agreement.
A catalyst-free Schiff base reaction was applied to synthesize two imine-linked covalent organic frameworks (COFs). The condensation reaction of 1,3,5-tris-(4-aminophenyl)triazine (TAPT) with 4,4′-biphenyldicarboxaldehyde led to the structure of HHU-COF-1 (HHU = Heinrich-Heine University). The fluorinated analog HHU-COF-2 was obtained with 2,2′,3,3′,5,5′,6,6′-octafluoro-4,4′-biphenyldicarboxaldehyde. Solid-state NMR, infrared spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and elemental analysis confirmed the successful formation of the two network structures. The crystalline materials are characterized by high Brunauer–Emmett–Teller surface areas of 2352 m2/g for HHU-COF-1 and 1356 m2/g for HHU-COF-2. The products of a larger-scale synthesis were applied to prepare mixed-matrix membranes (MMMs) with the polymer Matrimid. CO2/CH4 permeation tests revealed a moderate increase in CO2 permeability at constant selectivity for HHU-COF-1 as a dispersed phase, whereas application of the fluorinated COF led to a CO2/CH4 selectivity increase from 42 for the pure Matrimid membrane to 51 for 8 wt% of HHU-COF-2 and a permeability increase from 6.8 to 13.0 Barrer for the 24 wt% MMM.
Chapter 6: Case studies
(2023)