| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Beal, Jacob, et al.
(author)
-
Robust estimation of bacterial cell count from optical density
- 2020
-
In: Communications Biology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2399-3642. ; 3:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Optical density (OD) is widely used to estimate the density of cells in liquid culture, but cannot be compared between instruments without a standardized calibration protocol and is challenging to relate to actual cell count. We address this with an interlaboratory study comparing three simple, low-cost, and highly accessible OD calibration protocols across 244 laboratories, applied to eight strains of constitutive GFP-expressing E. coli. Based on our results, we recommend calibrating OD to estimated cell count using serial dilution of silica microspheres, which produces highly precise calibration (95.5% of residuals <1.2-fold), is easily assessed for quality control, also assesses instrument effective linear range, and can be combined with fluorescence calibration to obtain units of Molecules of Equivalent Fluorescein (MEFL) per cell, allowing direct comparison and data fusion with flow cytometry measurements: in our study, fluorescence per cell measurements showed only a 1.07-fold mean difference between plate reader and flow cytometry data.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
-
- 2019
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 5. |
- Hyde, K. D., et al.
(author)
-
Global consortium for the classification of fungi and fungus-like taxa
- 2023
-
In: MYCOSPHERE. - : Mushroom Research Foundation. - 2077-7000 .- 2077-7019. ; 14:1, s. 1960-2012
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Global Consortium for the Classification of Fungi and fungus-like taxa is an international initiative of more than 550 mycologists to develop an electronic structure for the classification of these organisms. The members of the Consortium originate from 55 countries/regions worldwide, from a wide range of disciplines, and include senior, mid-career and early-career mycologists and plant pathologists. The Consortium will publish a biannual update of the Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa, to act as an international scheme for other scientists. Notes on all newly published taxa at or above the level of species will be prepared and published online on the Outline of Fungi website (https://www.outlineoffungi.org/), and these will be finally published in the biannual edition of the Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa. Comments on recent important taxonomic opinions on controversial topics will be included in the biannual outline. For example, 'to promote a more stable taxonomy in Fusarium given the divergences over its generic delimitation', or 'are there too many genera in the Boletales?' and even more importantly, 'what should be done with the tremendously diverse 'dark fungal taxa?' There are undeniable differences in mycologists' perceptions and opinions regarding species classification as well as the establishment of new species. Given the pluralistic nature of fungal taxonomy and its implications for species concepts and the nature of species, this consortium aims to provide a platform to better refine and stabilise fungal classification, taking into consideration views from different parties. In the future, a confidential voting system will be set up to gauge the opinions of all mycologists in the Consortium on important topics. The results of such surveys will be presented to the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi (ICTF) and the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi (NCF) with opinions and percentages of votes for and against. Criticisms based on scientific evidence with regards to nomenclature, classifications, and taxonomic concepts will be welcomed, and any recommendations on specific taxonomic issues will also be encouraged; however, we will encourage professionally and ethically responsible criticisms of others' work. This biannual ongoing project will provide an outlet for advances in various topics of fungal classification, nomenclature, and taxonomic concepts and lead to a community-agreed classification scheme for the fungi and fungus-like taxa. Interested parties should contact the lead author if they would like to be involved in future outlines.
|
|
| 6. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2015
-
In: Journal of High Energy Physics. - 1029-8479 .- 1126-6708. ; :10
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
