Question about cytoplasmic staining.

From: Plett, P Artur (pplett@iupui.edu)
Date: Wed Sep 26 2001 - 13:43:35 EST


Hello flowers

Two questions about cytoplasmic staining

I wanted to confirm that when cells are fixed with formaldehyde, are all
cytoplasmic proteins are fixed as well? And would therefore any antibody
used to stain cytoplasmic proteins have to be able to recognize fixed
proteins and a "fixed" epitope? Is that a big problem and could it be
avoided by fixing first, then permeabilizing without any fixative in the
solution?

And, part two, I tried using the control of pre-incubating a polyclonal
antibody with the recombinant chemokine and then stained the cells with the
mixture, but what I got was actually higher fluorescence than in the cells
stained with the antibody alone. Does this mean the conjugates got stuck
inside of the cells?

Any help would be greatly appreciated


**********************
Artur Plett
Post-doctoral fellow
IU Sch. of  Medicine Div. of Hematology/Oncology
1044 W. Walnut St
Indianapolis, IN 46202
phone: 317-274-0352
fax: 317-278-3538

-----Original Message-----
From: Calman Prussin [mailto:CPRUSSIN@niaid.nih.gov]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 9:49 AM
To: cyto-inbox
Subject: RE: More about cytoplasmic staining.



This is not a control too far!

A substantial  fraction of the intracellular cytokine staining that I see
appears to be artifact. Blocked controls such as you describe are one of the
best ways to verify your data and avoid such artifacts.

Intracellular staining with a new mAb or new system should be validated 2-3
times using either an unlabelled mAb or recombinant cytokine blocked
control. Isotype controls by themselves are not adequate and should only be
used once you have performed more rigorous blocking controls. Different mAbs
posses different non-specific binding characteristics, thus some isotype
matched controls may poorly match the non-specific bonding of you
anti-cytokine mAb. Fixed permeabilized cells demonstrate far greater
non-specific binding than fresh cells and thus require more stringent
controls.

 I have typically used 100 mcg/ml of unlabeled mAb (staining in 50 ul) to
block and then add the labeled anti-cytokine mAb to the blocked cells
WITHOUT washing out the unlabeled mAb. The correct positive control for this
is to block with 100 mcg of isotype control, then stain with the labeled
anti-cytokine mAb.

The most rigorous control is to stain with 2 different mAbs that recognize 2
different mAbs on the intracellular Ag, demonstrate they recognize the same
population and then block each separately (Prussin, J Immunol Methods 188:
117-128)

A more detailed discussion of these issues is presented in Unit 6.24 of
current Protocols in Immunology.

Calman

_______________________

Calman Prussin

Laboratory of Allergic Diseases

NIAID/ National Institutes of Health

Building 10, Room 11C205, MSC-1881

Bethesda, MD  20892-1881

(301) 496-1306 (Voice)

(301) 496-1306 (Fax)

calman@nih.gov

	----------
From:	Finney, Simon
Sent:	Wednesday, September 12, 2001 5:52
To: cyto-inbox
Subject:	More about cytoplasmic staining.


	Dear all,

	There has been a bit of discussion about intracellular staining
recently
with primary conjugated antibodies.

	I was trying to prove specificity of my intracellular binding by
blocking
with unconjugated antibody first. My conjugated antibody still appears to
bind but I am unclear as to appropriate doses to block with and whether the
conjugated one can swap places with unconjugated one during the second
incubation.

	Is this a control too far ?

	Isotype controls (admittedly from a different company) show no
binding.

	Thanks

	Dr Simon Finney
Unit of Critical Care
NHLI at Imperial College
London UK



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:57:54 EST