Awesome article. “DNBSEQ-TX”, probably DNB=DNA NanoBall. p.s., if could adapt ~this for FISSEQ-ExM, could perhaps do in-situ barcode connectomics at speed... :-)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19892942/ …
https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.5103
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/294637v1 … #dnananoballs #rolonies #brain #fasterhttps://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1232771616825892865 …
-
-
Replying to @AdamMarblestone
Would be brighter, but diffusion might be an issue since antibodies are larger than fluorescent nucleotides.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PawlowAC
Yeah it is true, potentially a problem for FISSEQ. But maybe not, insomuch as you can do some post-expansion antibody staining, e.g., per recent Dawen Cai paper. The robotic dipping of big chips into big vats is pretty cool regardless though...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdamMarblestone
I'm thinking moreso that it will be slower overall than e.g., traditional reversible terminators. Imaging a bit faster because 3 - 4x brighter, but much longer staining duration. But I've seen Richie's imaging time, so maybe even 25% faster imaging is significant in this case.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PawlowAC @AdamMarblestone
But I see your point about the automation, that's super cool. I was just thinking of the difference in sequencing chemistries.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah totally. For truly large volume or area, I do feel it becomes limited by imaging time, because staining is so parallel across the sample, while lenses limit field of view, although w/ a lot of cameras + lenses ($$$) you can tile that in parallel too...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.