A binary approach is one of the best ways to evaluate antibody specificity. By testing an antibody in biologically relevant positive and negative expression systems, it is possible to confirm that it  recognizes the target antigen in its native environment without cross-reacting with other biomolecules present in the sample.

Antibodies are essential reagents that support all levels of scientific research. Used in a multitude of applications to identify, quantify, and isolate specific target biomolecules, they have recently become the focus of intense scrutiny for their contribution to the ongoing reproducibility crisis.

Have you ever wondered about the minds behind our antibodies? We talk a lot about validation, specificity, sensitivity, and reproducibility. All of that is very important, but that doesn't tell you much about who developed it.

When you’re shopping for antibodies, there are so many factors to consider. For example, will it work in my cell or tissue model? Has it been tested in the application I want to use? Sometimes it’s a struggle to find what you need because your options are limited, but in other instances there may be several reagents that seem like they could work in your experiment.

Researchers who run a lot of chromatin immunoprecipitation "ChIP" assays – maybe even your advisor – might subscribe to the idea that polyclonal antibodies perform better than monoclonal antibodies. But is that always actually true?

It’s worth your time to understand the differences between the two in terms of antigen recognition and specificity, and dispel some myths. 

I’m a Product Scientist at Cell Signaling Technology (CST). My typical work day no longer looks like my fellow scientists’ daily grind, and at times, I even find it difficult to describe in words what I do, but I’ll give it a shot!

Here at CST, we frequently get questions about the proper shipping temperature for antibodies. So we thought we would do an interview with an expert on this topic, our very own Seneca Stone who directs our global supply chain operations.

We as scientists learn from each success and failure. Sometimes it takes many failures to achieve success. And some discoveries are made with no fanfare, far from the spotlight. Other times, a good day’s work is even sweeter when you realize someone noticed!

So your experiments and data are funneling you down an inescapable path. You need to show direct gene regulation by your protein of interest. You think to yourself, “Oh, ChIP...”

The importance of antibodies as tools in scientific research studies cannot be understated, yet these reagents have increasingly come under fire for their lack of reproducibility. Part of the issue is that the antibody market is composed of hundreds of vendors and resellers with varying definitions for validation and consistency. Cell Signaling Technology (CST) believes that antibody suppliers should be held accountable for the products they provide, but that vendors alone cannot solve the reproducibility “crisis." How antibodies are validated and used in the laboratory is a critical component to this process. Researchers need to be more attentive to following established protocols and leverage the expertise of the scientists who have developed and tested the product they are using. Journals need to be more active in enforcing existing policies regarding materials and methods or develop more clear-cut means to identify and describe the use of biological reagents in published research. During this webinar we will address the role vendors, researchers, and journals should play in minimizing irreproducibility. We will also outline CST’s antibody validation process, while highlighting steps all users should consider when selecting and using antibodies in their research.