Advertisement

Abstract

Some of the most powerful methods of gathering data in the cell culture laboratory use visual observation. While it can take a good deal of time to develop techniques to transfer the visual observations into quantitative data, these numbers frequently still do not convey the qualitative information conveyed by visual observation. Visual observation thus remains an invaluable tool of the experienced cell culturist and cell biologist in gathering information on the status of cultures and experiments. This information is extremely valuable in making the ongoing decisions involved in establishing cell lines, maintaining healthy cultures in the laboratory, and deciding which lines of research to pursue. A trained eye and the knowledge base to interpret the observed phenomenon are therefore assets to any cell biologist.

Keywords

Light Microscope Level Inverted Phase Contrast Microscope Subcellular Component Phase Ring Tissue Culture Supernatant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boyde, A., 1985, Stereoscopic images in confocal (tandem scanning) microscopy, Science 230:1270–1272.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyde, A., 1986, Applications of tandem scanning reflected light microscopy and three-dimensional imaging, Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 483:428–439.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chroma, T. C., 1994, Chroma Handbook of Optical Filters for Fluorescence Microscopy Google Scholar
  4. Eidelman, O., and Cabantchik, Z. I., 1989, Continuous monitoring of transport by fluorescence on cells and vesicles, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 988:319–334.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fawcett, D., 1981, The Cell, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  6. Fink, R., 1991, A Dozen Eggs: Time Lapse Microscopy of Normal Development, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Fink, R., 1995, CELLabration, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Horan, P. K., and Slezak, S. E., 1989, Stable cell membrane labelling, Nature 340:167–168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson, L. V., Walsh, M. L., and Chen, L. B., 1980, Localization of mitochondria in living cells with rhodamine 123, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77:990–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kuffler, D. P., 1990, Long-term survival and sprouting in culture by motoneurons isolated from the spinal cord of adult frogs, J. Comp. Neurol. 302:720–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pickett-Heaps, J., and Pickett-Heaps, J., 1996, Living Cells: Structure and Diversity, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  12. Robertson, E. A., and Schaltze, R. L., 1970, The impurities in commercial glutaraldehyde and their effect on the fixation of brain, J. Ultrastr. Res. 30:275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Serbedzija, D. N., Frazer, S. E., and Bonner-Fraser, M., 1990, Pathways of trunk crest cell migration in the mouse embryos as revealed by vital dye labeling, Development 108:605–612.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Strieker, S. A., Paddock, S., and Schatten, G., 1990, Laser scanning confocal microscopy of living sea urchin embryos: 3-D reconstruction and calcium ion imaging, in: The American Society for Cell Biology Thirtieth Annual Meeting, Vol. III (T. Wilson, ed.), The Rockefeller University Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 113a.Google Scholar
  15. Wilson, T. (ed.), 1990, Confocal Microscopy, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1998

Personalised recommendations