↓ Skip to main content

Flow Cytometry Protocols

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Flow Cytometry Protocols'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Flow Cytometry: The Glass Is Half Full
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 High-Dimensional Modeling for Cytometry: Building Rock Solid Models Using GemStone™ and Verity Cen-se’™ High-Definition t-SNE Mapping
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Mass Cytometry Assays for Antigen-Specific T Cells Using CyTOF
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 RNA Flow Cytometry Using the Branched DNA Technique
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Analysis of Individual Extracellular Vesicles by Flow Cytometry
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Quantitative Fluorescence Measurements with Multicolor Flow Cytometry
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 High Throughput Flow Cytometry for Cell Surface Profiling
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Multiparameter Conventional Flow Cytometry
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Multiparameter Intracellular Cytokine Staining
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Multiparametric Analysis of Apoptosis by Flow Cytometry
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Multiparameter Cell Cycle Analysis
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Monitoring Cell Proliferation by Dye Dilution: Considerations for Probe Selection
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Immunophenotypic Identification of Early Myeloerythroid Development
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Flow Cytometry Assays in Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Real-Time Deformability Cytometry: Label-Free Functional Characterization of Cells
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Nuclear Cytometry: Analysis of the Patterns of DNA Synthesis and Transcription Using Flow Cytometry, Confocal Microscopy, and RNA Sequencing
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Flow Cytometric FRET Analysis of Protein Interactions
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 Overview of Fluorescence Lifetime Measurements in Flow Cytometry
  20. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 19 Overview of Lasers for Flow Cytometry
  21. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 20 Flow Cytometry: The Glass Is Half Empty
Attention for Chapter 3: Mass Cytometry Assays for Antigen-Specific T Cells Using CyTOF
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Mass Cytometry Assays for Antigen-Specific T Cells Using CyTOF
Chapter number 3
Book title
Flow Cytometry Protocols
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-7346-0_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-7344-6, 978-1-4939-7346-0
Authors

Dongxia Lin, Holden T. Maecker

Abstract

T Cells specific for a single antigen tend to be rare, even after expansion of memory cells. They are commonly detected by in vitro stimulation with peptides or protein, followed by staining for intracellular cytokines. In this protocol, we use CyTOF(®) mass cytometry to collect single-cell data on a large number of cytokines/chemokines, as well as cell-surface proteins that characterize T cells and other immune cells. We also include a method for magnetic bead enrichment of antigen-stimulated T cells, based on their expression of CD154 and CD69. Coupling magnetic enrichment with highly multi-parameter mass cytometry, this method enables the ability to dissect the frequency, phenotype, and function of antigen-specific T cells in greater detail than previously possible. Rare cell subsets can be examined, while minimizing run times on the CyTOF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 9 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 11%
Engineering 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,572,275
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#3,653
of 13,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,963
of 442,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#351
of 1,498 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,159 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,498 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.