Tissue-Like 3D Standard and Protocols for Microscope Quality Management.

This article outlines a global study conducted by the Association of Biomedical Resource Facilities (ABRF) Light Microscopy Research Group (LMRG). The results present a novel 3D tissue-like biologically relevant standard sample that is affordable and straightforward to prepare. Detailed sample preparation, instrument-specific image acquisition protocols and image analysis methods are presented and made available to the community. The standard consists of sub-resolution and large well characterized relative intensity fluorescence microspheres embedded in a 120 µm thick 3D gel with a refractive index of 1.365. The standard allows the evaluation of several properties as a function of depth. These include the following: 1) microscope resolution with automated analysis of the point-spread function (PSF), 2) automated signal-to-noise ratio analysis, 3) calibration and correction of fluorescence intensity loss, and 4) quantitative relative intensity. Results demonstrate expected refractive index mismatch dependent losses in intensity and resolution with depth, but the relative intensities of different objects at similar depths are maintained. This is a robust standard showing reproducible results across laboratories, microscope manufacturers and objective lens types (e.g., magnification, immersion medium). Thus, these tools will be valuable for the global community to benchmark fluorescence microscopes and will contribute to improved scientific rigor and reproducibility.

Reproducibility in light microscopy: Maintenance, standards and SOPs.

Light microscopy has grown to be a valuable asset in both the physical and life sciences. It is a highly quantitative method available in individual research laboratories and often centralized in core facilities. However, although quantitative microscopy is becoming a customary tool in research, it is rarely standardized. To achieve accurate quantitative microscopy data and reproducible results, three levels of standardization must be considered: (1) aspects of the microscope, (2) the sample, and (3) the detector. The accuracy of the data is only as reliable as the imaging system itself, thereby imposing the need for routine standard performance testing. Depending on the task some maintenance procedures should be performed once a month, some before each imaging session, while others conducted annually. This text should be implemented as a resource for researchers to integrate with their own standard operating procedures to ensure the highest quality quantitative microscopy data.