Immunohistochemistry shows a positive label for tissue-specific (a) Na/K ATPase α5, (b) TROMA I, (c) cingulin and (d) COX 2 protein.
Currently, the gold standard for diagnosis of most solid tumors is based on tissue biological changes or specific antibody labeling of tissue specimens.
For IF microscopy, cells in 24‐well dishes were washed with PBS followed by fixation with 4% paraformaldehyde for 10 min. Following PBS washes, cells were labeled as above for tissue sections and image obtained with an Evos fluorescent microscope (AMG).
For tissue labeling, we used the fluorescent dye combination DiI/DiO (Vargesson et al., 1997).
4) A very nice aspect of this study is the use of Tokuyasu protocol for tissue labeling.
We then inferred the correct label for sample i in tissue s to be arg max j ≠ i r i j s.
However, this technique is limited by its capacity to compare only two samples, and stable isotopic labeling is not currently feasible for tissue homogenates.
This demonstrates that in addition to their activation for tissue regeneration, labelled bulge cells are able to replenish the HF SC pool over longer time periods.
For staining retrogradely labeled tissue for WGA expression, floating slices were washed in PBS/1% TritonX-100 (3 times each 5 min) and then incubated for 30 min with 10 μg/ml proteinase K at RT.
After 9.5 hr in PGN-FSIO containing the V. fischeri inoculum, animals were exposed to Cell Tracker Orange CMRA (Invitrogen Molecular Probes, Carlsbad, CA) for 30 min to label host tissue.
However, specificity concerns may also be compounded if sense probes used as negative controls for antisense probe binding label the tissue of interest (one definition of 'non-specific' hybridization), which is not implausible since over 50% of the mammalian genome can produce transcripts from both DNA strands [155].
