Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28448038›Full record

ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2017

Preparation of Non-human Primate Brain Tissue for Pre-embedding Immunohistochemistry and Electron Microscopy.

Lara Eid, Martin Parent

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lara EidCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Québec, Department of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Université Laval; Centre de recherche du CHU Sainte-Justine; lara.eid@umontreal.ca.
Martin ParentCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire en santé mentale de Québec, Department of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Université Laval.
Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec · CAUniversité Laval · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite all the technological advances at the light microscopy level, electron microscopy remains the only tool in neuroscience to examine and characterize ultrastructural and morphological details of neurons, such as synaptic contacts. Good preservation of brain tissue for electron microscopy can be obtained by rigorous cryo-fixation methods, but these techniques are rather costly and limit the use of immunolabeling, which is crucial to understand the connectivity of identified neuronal systems. Freeze-substitution methods have been developed to allow the combination of cryo-fixation with immunolabeling. However, the reproducibility of these methodological approaches usually relies on costly freezing devices. Moreover, achieving reliable results with this technique is very time-consuming and skill-challenging. Hence, the traditional chemically fixed brain, particularly with acrolein fixative, remains a time-efficient and low-cost method to combine electron microscopy with immunohistochemistry. Here, we provide a reliable experimental protocol using chemical acrolein fixation that leads to the preservation of primate brain tissue and is compatible with pre-embedding immunohistochemistry and transmission electron microscopic examination.

Indexed as

ImmunohistochemistryMicroscopy, ElectronPrimatesAnimalsBrainCryopreservationFixativesMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionNeuronsReproducibility of ResultsTissue FixationFixatives

Identifiers

PMID28448038
PMCPMC5564458
OpenAlexW2603683329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.