MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416331498 · doi:10.1111/jmi.70048

Review of expansion microscopy combined with advanced imaging modalities

2025· article· en· W4416331498 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie Woo, Claire M. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microscopy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroscopyLight sheet fluorescence microscopyFluorescence microscopePhotoactivated localization microscopySTED microscopyBiological specimenSuper-resolution microscopyResolution (logic)Optical microscope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expansion microscopy (ExM) is a powerful high-resolution imaging technique that enhances the spatial resolution of conventional light microscopy by physically enlarging biological specimens by embedding and cross-linking them in a swellable polymer network. This review explores the combination of ExM with commonly used advanced fluorescence imaging modalities, including light sheet fluorescence microscopy (LSFM), stimulated emission depletion (STED), structured illumination microscopy (SIM), single-molecule localisation microscopy (SMLM), and computational super-resolution radial fluctuations (SRRF) to push the boundaries of achievable resolution in biological imaging. By integrating ExM with these optical and analytical approaches, researchers can visualise subcellular structures and molecular complexes with unprecedented clarity, enabling the study of intricate biological processes that are otherwise inaccessible with conventional light microscopy methods. The review covers the theoretical resolutions attainable with each combined technique, example biological questions they can address, and key considerations for optimising their use. Together, these advancements offer novel insights into nanoscale cellular and subcellular structures, opening new avenues for exploration in fields such as neuroscience, cancer research, and developmental biology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MicroscopySame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207