ArticleJournal of biophotonics2018
Response to Comment on "Is the nuclear refractive index lower than cytoplasm? Validation of phase measurements and implications for light scattering technologies": A Comment on "How a phase image of a cell with nucleus refractive index smaller than that of the cytoplasm should look like?", e201800033.
Article in Journal of biophotonics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid and precise tracking of water influx and efflux across cell membranes induced by a pulsed electric field.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Comprehensive single-shot biophysical cytometry using simultaneous quantitative phase imaging and Brillouin spectroscopy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Review
- Reconstruction of angle-resolved backscattering through a multimode fiber for cell nuclei and particle size determination.APL photonics · 2020Article
- Light scattering methods for tissue diagnosis.Optica · 2019Article
- Angular range, sampling and noise considerations for inverse light scattering analysis of nuclear morphology.Journal of biophotonics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recently, Maxim A. Yurkin commented on our paper "Is the nuclear refractive index lower than cytoplasm? Validation of phase measurements and implications for light scattering technologies" as well as on a complementary study "Cell nuclei have lower refractive index and mass density than cytoplasm" from Schürmann et al. In his comment, Yurkin concluded that quantitative phase images of cells with nuclei that are less optically dense than the cytoplasm must exhibit a characteristic concavity, the absence of which is evidence against our conclusion of a less-dense nucleus. In this response, we suggest that Yurkin's conclusion is reached through an oversimplification of the spatial refractive index distribution within cells, which does not account for high index inclusions such as the nucleolus. We further cite recent studies in 3-dimensional refractive index imaging, in which the preponderance of studies supports our conclusion. Finally, we comment on the current state of knowledge regarding subcellular refractive index distributions in living cells.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.