TEM, SEM, and STEM-based immuno-CLEM workflows offer complementary advantages
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying endogenous tissue stem cells remains a key challenge in developmental and regenerative biology. To distinguish and molecularly characterise stem cell populations in large heterogeneous tissues, the combination of cytochemical cell markers with ultrastructural morphology is highly beneficial. Here, we realise this through workflows of multi-resolution immuno-correlative light and electron microscopy (iCLEM) methodologies. Taking advantage of the antigenicity preservation of the Tokuyasu technique, we have established robust protocols and workflows and provide a side-by-side comparison of iCLEM used in combination with scanning EM (SEM), scanning TEM (STEM), or transmission EM (TEM). Evaluation of the applications and advantages of each method highlights their practicality for the identification, quantification, and characterization of heterogeneous cell populations in small organisms, organs, or tissues in healthy and diseased states. The iCLEM techniques are broadly applicable and can use either genetically encoded or cytochemical markers on plant, animal and human tissues. We demonstrate how these protocols are particularly suited for investigating neural stem and progenitor cell populations of the vertebrate nervous system.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it