BrainPhys neuronal medium optimized for imaging and optogenetics in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The capabilities of imaging technologies, fluorescent sensors, and optogenetics tools for cell biology are advancing. In parallel, cellular reprogramming and organoid engineering are expanding the use of human neuronal models in vitro. This creates an increasing need for tissue culture conditions better adapted to live-cell imaging. Here, we identify multiple caveats of traditional media when used for live imaging and functional assays on neuronal cultures (i.e., suboptimal fluorescence signals, phototoxicity, and unphysiological neuronal activity). To overcome these issues, we develop a neuromedium called BrainPhys™ Imaging (BPI) in which we optimize the concentrations of fluorescent and phototoxic compounds. BPI is based on the formulation of the original BrainPhys medium. We benchmark available neuronal media and show that BPI enhances fluorescence signals, reduces phototoxicity and optimally supports the electrical and synaptic activity of neurons in culture. We also show the superior capacity of BPI for optogenetics and calcium imaging of human neurons. Altogether, our study shows that BPI improves the quality of a wide range of fluorescence imaging applications with live neurons in vitro while supporting optimal neuronal viability and function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".