Search

Images document scientific discoveries and are prevalent in modern biomedical research. Microscopy imaging in particular is currently undergoing rapid technological advancements. However, for scientists wishing to publish obtained images and image-analysis results, there are currently no unified guidelines for best practices. Consequently, microscopy images and image data in publications may be unclear or difficult to interpret. Here, we present community-developed checklists for preparing light microscopy images and describing image analyses for publications. These checklists offer authors, readers and publishers key recommendations for image formatting and annotation, color selection, data availability and reporting image-analysis workflows. The goal of our guidelines is to increase the clarity and reproducibility of image figures and thereby to heighten the quality and explanatory power of microscopy data., (© 2023. Springer Nature America, Inc.)

A modern day light microscope has evolved from a tool devoted to making primarily empirical observations to what is now a sophisticated , quantitative device that is an integral part of both physical and life science research. Nowadays, microscopes are found in nearly every experimental laboratory. However, despite their prevalent use in capturing and quantifying scientific phenomena, neither a thorough understanding of the principles underlying quantitative imaging techniques nor appropriate knowledge of how to calibrate, operate and maintain microscopes can be taken for granted. This is clearly demonstrated by the well-documented and widespread difficulties that are routinely encountered in evaluating acquired data and reproducing scientific experiments. Indeed, studies have shown that more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to repeat another scientist's experiments, while more than half have even failed to reproduce their own experiments. One factor behind the reproducibility crisis of experiments published in scientific journals is the frequent underreporting of imaging methods caused by a lack of awareness and/or a lack of knowledge of the applied technique. Whereas quality control procedures for some methods used in biomedical research, such as genomics (e.g. DNA sequencing, RNA-seq) or cytometry, have been introduced (e.g. ENCODE), this issue has not been tackled for optical microscopy instrumentation and images. Although many calibration standards and protocols have been published, there is a lack of awareness and agreement on common standards and guidelines for quality assessment and reproducibility. In April 2020, the QUality Assessment and REProducibility for instruments and images in Light Microscopy (QUAREP-LiMi) initiative was formed. This initiative comprises imaging scientists from academia and industry who share a common interest in achieving a better understanding of the performance and limitations of microscopes and improved quality control (QC) in light microscopy. The ultimate goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to establish a set of common QC standards, guidelines, metadata models and tools, including detailed protocols, with the ultimate aim of improving reproducible advances in scientific research. This White Paper (1) summarizes the major obstacles identified in the field that motivated the launch of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative; (2) identifies the urgent need to address these obstacles in a grassroots manner, through a community of stakeholders including, researchers, imaging scientists, bioimage analysts, bioimage informatics developers, corporate partners, funding agencies, standards organizations, scientific publishers and observers of such; (3) outlines the current actions of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative and (4) proposes future steps that can be taken to improve the dissemination and acceptance of the proposed guidelines to manage QC. To summarize, the principal goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to improve the overall quality and reproducibility of light microscope image data by introducing broadly accepted standard practices and accurately captured image data metrics., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Microscopy published by JohnWiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal Microscopical Society.)

SLURP1 is a secreted member of the LY6/PLAUR protein family. Mutations in the SLURP1 gene are the cause of Mal de Meleda (MDM), a rare autosomal recessive genetic disease, characterized by inflammatory palmoplantar keratoderma. In this study, we have analyzed the expression of SLURP1 in normal and MDM skin. SLURP1 was found to be a marker of late differentiation, predominantly expressed in the granular layer of skin, notably the acrosyringium. Moreover, SLURP1 was also identified in several biological fluids such as sweat, saliva, tears, and urine from normal volunteers. In palmoplantar sections from MDM patients, as well as in their sweat, mutant SLURP1, including the new variant R71H-SLURP1, was either absent or barely detectable. Transfected human embryonic kidney 293T cells expressed the MDM mutant SLURP1 containing the single amino-acid substitution G86R but did not tolerate the MDM mutation W15R located in the signal peptide. Thus, most MDM mutations in SLURP1 affect either the expression, integrity, or stability of the protein, suggesting that a simple immunologic test could be used as a rapid screening procedure.

Mal de Meleda is an autosomal recessive inflammatory and keratotic palmoplantar skin disorder due to mutations in the ARS B gene, encoding for SLURP-1 (secreted mammalian Ly-6/uPAR-related protein 1). SLURP-1 belongs to the Ly-6/uPAR superfamily of receptor and secreted proteins, which participate in signal transduction, immune cell activation or cellular adhesion. The high degree of structural similarity between SLURP-1 and the three fingers motif of snake neurotoxins and Lynx1 suggests that this protein interacts with the neuronal acetylcholine receptors. We found that SLURP-1 potentiates the human alpha 7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors that are present in keratinocytes. These results identify SLURP-1 as a secreted epidermal neuromodulator which is likely to be essential for both epidermal homeostasis and inhibition of TNF-alpha release by macrophages during wound healing. This explains both the hyperproliferative as well as the inflammatory clinical phenotype of Mal de Meleda.

The accurate classification of skeletal muscle fiber types according to myosin heavy chain (MyHC) polymorphism remains a difficult task in the pig. Combined myofibrillar ATPase and metabolic enzyme histochemistry, in situ hybridization, and immunocytochemistry were performed on serial transverse sections of pig longissimus (L) and rhomboideus (R) muscles at 100 kg body weight to give a new insight into muscle fiber typing in the pig. Several monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) either specific for a single MyHC (I, IIa, or IIb) or of multiple MyHCs (IIa + IIx or I + IIx + IIb) were used. No monospecific IIx antibody was available for the pig. All three adult Type II isoforms were expressed in the white L muscle, whereas no IIb was observed in the red R muscle, which was confirmed using RNase protection analysis. In most fibers, the distribution of the transcripts closely matched that of the corresponding proteins. When observed, co-expression of MyHCs mostly occured for IIx and IIb in L muscle, and was more common at the protein (11.5%) than at the mRNA (2.2%) level. A minor proportion of myofibers showed a mismatch between MyHC mRNA and protein. According to the type grouping distribution of myofibers encountered in pig muscle, MyHC isoform expression followed the rank order of I-->IIa-->IIx-->IIb from the center to the periphery of the islets, concomitantly with a decrease in oxidative metabolism and an increase in fiber size. The developmental origin and functional significance of the type grouping distribution are discussed.