For decades, immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been a powerful technique for the investigation and visualization of cellular components in their native histological context. IHC has served as an important tool in medicine – enabling the diagnosis of complex pathological conditions – and in basic research to advance the understanding of key biological processes.
Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) is a flexible and powerful technique used by researchers to elucidate how gene regulation is involved with different biological events and with the progression of various conditions like cancer and neurodegenerative diseases.
Careful planning and the fine tuning of experimental protocols are key to ensuring clear, interpretable scientific results. This is especially true for immunohistochemistry (IHC) studies, where each step in the often multiday process – from tissue preparation to stain development – can significantly impact the final outcome and analysis. Often, the simultaneous examination of multiple antigens is required to address specific scientific questions, which further complicates IHC protocol development. A general understating of the steps necessary to optimize IHC for multiple targets is essential to achieve reliable results. So, what are these steps?
What is flow cytometry and how is it used?
Flow cytometry enables you to save time and analyze many characteristics of your cells in one experiment, using classic principles of antibody detection.
Finally, the finish line is approaching! You have completed your specific aims, significance and innovation, and the bulk of your research strategy. You have sent those files for numerous rounds of pre-peer review by your trusted colleagues and mentors. Now it’s time to focus on some smaller, yet still very important details.
In the previous post, we described how to write an effective significance and innovation section, focused on defining the problem and providing a high-level overview of your proposed solution. In this post, we’ll outline the approach, wherein you’ll expand upon the solution and illustrate exactly how you plan to conduct the research.
The significance and innovation section is a recent (within the last 10 years) addition to the NIH and most other foundation grant applications. It is a place for you to showcase WHY the work should be done – WHY there is a significant need for your study, and HOW the work is different from everyone else’s approach. What makes it groundbreaking, original research, work that will advance our scientific knowledge?
So you’re thinking of writing a grant? Or maybe your mentor has politely suggested that it would be in your best interest to do so?
Where do you start?
Tamar Aprahamian is an interesting study in the professional opportunities available for young scientists. She's worked in academia, industry, and most recently, founded a company of science writers called JetPub. She has been a contributor to our blog and was nice enough to share her story.