-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Best practices for instrument settings and raw data analysis in plant flow cytometry
P. Koutecký, T. Smith, J. Loureiro, P. Kron
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, přehledy
Grantová podpora
FCT/UIDB/04004/2020
Centro de Ecologia Funcional
RGPIN-2020-05652
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-000020
Programa Operacional Regional do Centro
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 2003 do Před 1 rokem
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
od 2012-06-01 do Před 1 rokem
Wiley Free Content
od 2003 do Před 1 rokem
PubMed
37807676
DOI
10.1002/cyto.a.24798
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- délka genomu MeSH
- kalibrace MeSH
- ploidie * MeSH
- průtoková cytometrie metody MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
Flow cytometry (FCM) is now the most widely used method to determine ploidy levels and genome size of plants. To get reliable estimates and allow reproducibility of measurements, the methodology should be standardized and follow the best practices in the field. In this article, we discuss instrument calibration and quality control and various instrument and acquisition settings (parameters, flow rate, number of events, scales, use of discriminators, peak positions). These settings must be decided before measurements because they determine the amount and quality of the data and thus influence all downstream analyses. We describe the two main approaches to raw data analysis (gating and histogram modeling), and we discuss their advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we provide a summary of best practice recommendations for data acquisition and raw data analysis in plant FCM.
Agriculture and Agri Food Canada Ottawa Ontario Canada
Centre for Functional Ecology Department of Life Sciences University of Coimbra Coimbra Portugal
Department of Botany Faculty of Science University of South Bohemia České Budějovice Czechia
Department of Integrative Biology University of Guelph Guelph Ontario Canada
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24000435
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240213093159.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240109s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1002/cyto.a.24798 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)37807676
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Koutecký, Petr $u Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czechia $1 https://orcid.org/000000023455850X $7 jx20100225013
- 245 10
- $a Best practices for instrument settings and raw data analysis in plant flow cytometry / $c P. Koutecký, T. Smith, J. Loureiro, P. Kron
- 520 9_
- $a Flow cytometry (FCM) is now the most widely used method to determine ploidy levels and genome size of plants. To get reliable estimates and allow reproducibility of measurements, the methodology should be standardized and follow the best practices in the field. In this article, we discuss instrument calibration and quality control and various instrument and acquisition settings (parameters, flow rate, number of events, scales, use of discriminators, peak positions). These settings must be decided before measurements because they determine the amount and quality of the data and thus influence all downstream analyses. We describe the two main approaches to raw data analysis (gating and histogram modeling), and we discuss their advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we provide a summary of best practice recommendations for data acquisition and raw data analysis in plant FCM.
- 650 _2
- $a průtoková cytometrie $x metody $7 D005434
- 650 _2
- $a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
- 650 _2
- $a kalibrace $7 D002138
- 650 12
- $a ploidie $7 D011003
- 650 _2
- $a délka genomu $7 D059646
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Smith, Tyler $u Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada $1 https://orcid.org/0000000176832653
- 700 1_
- $a Loureiro, João $u Centre for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal $1 https://orcid.org/0000000290683954
- 700 1_
- $a Kron, Paul $u Department of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada $1 https://orcid.org/0000000217345019
- 773 0_
- $w MED00013935 $t Cytometry. Part A $x 1552-4930 $g Roč. 103, č. 12 (2023), s. 953-966
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37807676 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240109 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240213093157 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2049228 $s 1210129
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 103 $c 12 $d 953-966 $e 20231008 $i 1552-4930 $m Cytometry. Part A $n Cytometry A $x MED00013935
- GRA __
- $a FCT/UIDB/04004/2020 $p Centro de Ecologia Funcional
- GRA __
- $a RGPIN-2020-05652 $p Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- GRA __
- $a CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-000020 $p Programa Operacional Regional do Centro
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240109