Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Avoiding bias in fluorescence sensor readout

  • Comment
  • Published:

From Nature Reviews Neuroscience

View current issue Sign up to alerts

Fluorescent indicators can provide quantitative insights into the spatiotemporal dynamics of signalling molecules released by brain circuits. However, a mismatch between the experimental context and the experimental imaging settings often introduces unexpected errors and biases in such measurements. Appreciating this mismatch should help researchers to arrive at unbiased estimates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1: Schematic illustrations of fluorescence indicator readouts prone to errors.

References

  1. Rusakov, D. A. Avoiding interpretational pitfalls in fluorescence imaging of the brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 23, 705–706 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Marvin, J. S. et al. Stability, affinity, and chromatic variants of the glutamate sensor iGluSnFR. Nat. Methods 15, 936–939 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhang, Y. et al. Fast and sensitive GCaMP calcium indicators for imaging neural populations. Nature 615, 884–891 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Magloire, V. et al. Volume-transmitted GABA waves pace epileptiform rhythms in the hippocampal network. Curr. Biol. 33, 1249–1264.e7 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Thestrup, T. et al. Optimized ratiometric calcium sensors for functional in vivo imaging of neurons and T lymphocytes. Nat. Methods 11, 175–182 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Genina, E. A. et al. Optical properties of brain tissues at the different stages of glioma development in rats: pilot study. Biomed. Opt. Express 10, 5182–5197 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhou, A. et al. Evaluation of resonant scanning as a high-speed imaging technique for two-photon imaging of cortical vasculature. Biomed. Opt. Express 13, 1374–1385 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Cole, R. W., Jinadasa, T. & Brown, C. M. Measuring and interpreting point spread functions to determine confocal microscope resolution and ensure quality control. Nat. Protocols 6, 1929–1941 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK

    Dmitri A. Rusakov

Authors
  1. Dmitri A. Rusakov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dmitri A. Rusakov.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Neuroscience thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rusakov, D.A. Avoiding bias in fluorescence sensor readout. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 25, 1–2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-023-00768-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-023-00768-9

  • Springer Nature Limited

Search

Navigation