English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Advances in flow cytometry (FCM) increasingly demand adoption of computational analysis tools to tackle the ever-growing data dimensionality. In this study, we tested different data input modes to evaluate how cytometry acquisition configuration and data compensation procedures affect the performance of unsupervised phenotyping tools. An analysis workflow was set up and tested for the detection of changes in reference bead subsets and in a rare subpopulation of murine lymph node CD103 + dendritic cells acquired by conventional or spectral cytometry. Raw spectral data or pseudospectral data acquired with the full set of available detectors by conventional cytometry consistently outperformed datasets acquired and compensated according to FCM standards. Our results thus challenge the paradigm of one-fluorochrome/one-parameter acquisition in FCM for unsupervised cluster-based analysis. Instead, we propose to configure instrument acquisition to use all available fluorescence detectors and to avoid integration and compensation procedures, thereby using raw spectral or pseudospectral data for improved automated phenotypic analysis.

Flow Cytometry Data Preparation Guidelines for Improved Automated Phenotypic Analysis