Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 07:13:35 -
[91] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:I have slightly more than 70% accuracy. I think I can be a scientist.
Come join the dark side! (awww I'd like a thumbs up smiley!) |
Ibutho Inkosi
Irubo Kovu
245
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 09:30:19 -
[92] - Quote
I had actually become a scientist, but I found it's not as good at getting the girls as being a rock singer. So, I extracted all that science mumbo jumbo I learnt in collidge into an injector and sold it to a pot dealing BS student I know. Then, I took the money and bought a Gibson SG with a whammy bar and a Magnatone amp! I got a friend of mine who used to play with Metallica to show me the two chords he knows, and now I'm a STAR!!
As long as the tale of the hunt is told by the hunter, and not the lion, it will favor the hunter.
|
beakerax
Pator Tech School
229
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:03:41 -
[93] - Quote
HPA Darkfield Oramara wrote:And from what we have seen from the test server, you are doing really good! My accuracy rating was great on the test server, but on Tranquility I can't budge from 53%.
edit: it would be really nice if the example images also had an rgb filter. |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:15:44 -
[94] - Quote
beakerax wrote:HPA Darkfield Oramara wrote:And from what we have seen from the test server, you are doing really good! My accuracy rating was great on the test server, but on Tranquility I can't budge from 53%. edit: it would be really nice if the example images also had an rgb filter.
Hehe i was trying it today and kudos to ppl who have the patient to keep playing! I think that most of the time I agreed with the choices ppl had made, or at least I understood why a certain choice was made. (i stopped playing at 60%)
Not the best option, but here you can look at reference images (NB that the overlap with the game isn't perfect, but I think it still might be of help). Usually 3-5 images per location and by clicking the HPAid on top of every image you can navigate to more images.
http://www.proteinatlas.org/learn/dictionary/cell |
Sheldon d'Albion
3
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:26:42 -
[95] - Quote
So Discovery ... , quite a big challenge with really puzzling "tests" I thought I could be good at that but unfortunatly some profond and obscur considerations prevent my accuracy to be better than 48% . I was quite sure before submitting that I would get an incorrect match despise a really good odds like this example http://imgur.com/JLX2vMj It is still funny but don't know something missing ...... |
beakerax
Pator Tech School
230
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:41:24 -
[96] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:http://www.proteinatlas.org/learn/dictionary/cell That does help, thank you! |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3048
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:41:44 -
[97] - Quote
Sheldon d'Albion wrote:So Discovery ... , quite a big challenge with really puzzling "tests" I thought I could be good at that but unfortunatly some profond and obscur considerations prevent my accuracy to be better than 48% . I was quite sure before submitting that I would get an incorrect match despise a really good odds like this example http://imgur.com/JLX2vMj It is still funny but don't know something missing ...... When below 50% you normally only get 'Known' samples, and the known samples normally only have a single attribute. Once over 50% you'll get a larger mix. Personally this threshold of known slides only should be much higher in order to make for better results on the unknown/unlabelled ones that use group consensus since it ensures that people working on the unknown slides actually know what they are marking.
While the random clickers can be filtered out of the results, they are having a significant negative impact in game due to being present in large enough numbers to skew everyone else's accuracy rating, meaning people are often being called 'wrong' for marking an actually existing feature simply because a large enough portion of people spammed cytoplasm on everything. |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:43:41 -
[98] - Quote
Sheldon d'Albion wrote:So Discovery ... , quite a big challenge with really puzzling "tests" I thought I could be good at that but unfortunatly some profond and obscur considerations prevent my accuracy to be better than 48% . I was quite sure before submitting that I would get an incorrect match despise a really good odds like this example http://imgur.com/JLX2vMj It is still funny but don't know something missing ......
Agree that it looks like cell to cell variation but with green plus blue toggled on I can't say more than that. Do you have a green only view of it? |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 11:49:31 -
[99] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Sheldon d'Albion wrote:So Discovery ... , quite a big challenge with really puzzling "tests" I thought I could be good at that but unfortunatly some profond and obscur considerations prevent my accuracy to be better than 48% . I was quite sure before submitting that I would get an incorrect match despise a really good odds like this example http://imgur.com/JLX2vMj It is still funny but don't know something missing ...... When below 50% you normally only get 'Known' samples, and the known samples normally only have a single attribute. Once over 50% you'll get a larger mix. Personally this threshold of known slides only should be much higher in order to make for better results on the unknown/unlabelled ones that use group consensus since it ensures that people working on the unknown slides actually know what they are marking. While the random clickers can be filtered out of the results, they are having a significant negative impact in game due to being present in large enough numbers to skew everyone else's accuracy rating, meaning people are often being called 'wrong' for marking an actually existing feature simply because a large enough portion of people spammed cytoplasm on everything.
Agree that it's annoying that you get "wrong" despite you know you're right (I feel the need to make an more extensive tutorial video really explaining the difference between golgi/mitochondria/vesicles and mtoc/aggresome which ppl seem to have problems with).
For the examples I looked at when playing I don't think the farming seemed to be that bad. I could in most cases really understand why one would choose those locations (but of course there were some where I was like "coooome on... How can you click nucleoplasm when it's clearly fibrillar center and nucleus" )
Hopefully ppl who don't play it with intentions of being serious will quit soon. |
beakerax
Pator Tech School
230
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 12:18:39 -
[100] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Hopefully ppl who don't play it with intentions of being serious will quit soon. I think the results have improved a bit already. The novelty factor was probably hurting this more than anything else.
I'm glad to see that you're taking the long view :) |
|
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 12:58:58 -
[101] - Quote
beakerax wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Hopefully ppl who don't play it with intentions of being serious will quit soon. I think the results have improved a bit already. The novelty factor was probably hurting this more than anything else. I'm glad to see that you're taking the long view :)
I'm (everyone in the group) are super excited over the interest for PD, and the crazy number of ppl that have been playing and helped classified the images. We never imagined this kind of turnout.
Also, glad to hear you think they've improved somewhat already, crossing fingers it'll continue that way! (I've been home sick since Wedn so today is the first day I've been able to try it - am now SO annoyed at being stuck at 60% since ages... wtf? ) |
Sheldon d'Albion
3
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 13:08:58 -
[102] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Sheldon d'Albion wrote:So Discovery ... , quite a big challenge with really puzzling "tests" I thought I could be good at that but unfortunatly some profond and obscur considerations prevent my accuracy to be better than 48% . I was quite sure before submitting that I would get an incorrect match despise a really good odds like this example http://imgur.com/JLX2vMj It is still funny but don't know something missing ...... Agree that it looks like cell to cell variation but with green plus blue toggled on I can't say more than that. Do you have a green only view of it?
Probably it is not like I know what i am doing :D I understand later that this is probably a partial answer but still get -0.5% and not neutral gain . By the way like the link , will take some time on it before coming back to discovery .
|
Memphis Baas
1315
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 14:11:02 -
[103] - Quote
Further comments:
1. The primary example image for each of the selections on the right side is sometimes confusing, as it is too crisp compared to the examples underneath, and compared to the sample on the left. I'm starting to ignore the primary example image and trying to compare the sample with the 3 sub-examples only.
2. I'd like to see an indicator of how busy the Discovery server is. Currently I'm getting time-outs if the TQ server is above 25k users, so I've calculated that you're getting about 3% of the players interested and hitting 800+ submissions/minute and timing out. But guessing this lag based on TQ login numbers is programming me to "not play Discovery during TQ prime time", which is not going to be good if you guys upgrade the server hardware and/or there's an in-game fight or something that keeps EVE players busy and thus lowers the Discovery server load. |
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
190
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 16:51:44 -
[104] - Quote
The "cytoplasm" option in the Cytoplasm section says that the stain should be everywhere "except in the nucleus (blue marker)".
If the markers should be everywhere BUT the blue, then, if I select it, any option for the nucleus should be disabled. But this is not the case, which indicates that I CAN select something for the nucleus even though this option says there should be nothing in it.
Is that right? Should the wording for this option be clarified or should the game disable all the nucleus options if you pick this one for the cytoplasm? |
Memphis Baas
1316
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 17:55:30 -
[105] - Quote
First, you're looking at a 3D cell that's been flattened somewhat, not a 2D slice of a cell, so cytoplasm could be above and below and around the nucleus, and in the image it will appear to be IN the nucleus. Like a semi-transparent fish, its liver is not IN its stomach, but from the side it could appear that way.
Second, you can have the markers bind separately to cytoplasm AND to something in the nucleus. So in that case you should see the cytoplasm pattern around the nucleus (and maybe more faded overlapping the nucleus), and you should be able to identify a pattern for what's in the nucleus as matching one of the nuclear patterns.
Basically, if you see strong cytoplasm green outside the nucleus and weak "inside" the nucleus, then it's just cytoplasm. If you see cytoplasm green, and the blue area clearly has the green nucleoli spheres, and you actually see spheres and not just fuzzy green, then their green dye has reacted with the cytoplasm AND the nucleoli, so you check both. |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
446
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 18:09:56 -
[106] - Quote
Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now.
Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday. |
|
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 18:43:43 -
[107] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:The "cytoplasm" option in the Cytoplasm section says that the stain should be everywhere "except in the nucleus (blue marker)".
If the markers should be everywhere BUT the blue, then, if I select it, any option for the nucleus should be disabled. But this is not the case, which indicates that I CAN select something for the nucleus even though this option says there should be nothing in it.
Is that right? Should the wording for this option be clarified or should the game disable all the nucleus options if you pick this one for the cytoplasm?
If you have a staining in the nucleus... Well then it's a nuclear staining there, not cytoplasm. They are not mutually exclusive. I It's just that if you see smt in the nucleus - it's not (or more than) cytoplasm.
I understand what you mean, but you should see it as separate stainings (cyto and nucleus). Um, I kinda have a problem expressing exactly what I mean, but hope you'll understand me. |
|
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 18:45:40 -
[108] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:First, you're looking at a 3D cell that's been flattened somewhat, not a 2D slice of a cell, so cytoplasm could be above and below and around the nucleus, and in the image it will appear to be IN the nucleus. Like a semi-transparent fish, its liver is not IN its stomach, but from the side it could appear that way.
Second, you can have the markers bind separately to cytoplasm AND to something in the nucleus. So in that case you should see the cytoplasm pattern around the nucleus (and maybe more faded overlapping the nucleus), and you should be able to identify a pattern for what's in the nucleus as matching one of the nuclear patterns.
Basically, if you see strong cytoplasm green outside the nucleus and weak "inside" the nucleus, then it's just cytoplasm. If you see cytoplasm green, and the blue area clearly has the green nucleoli spheres, and you actually see spheres and not just fuzzy green, then their green dye has reacted with the cytoplasm AND the nucleoli, so you check both.
I should have read this more carefully before posting, great explanation!! |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 18:46:33 -
[109] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now. Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday.
LOL if it makes you feel any better I seem to be stuck at 60%... |
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
193
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 19:52:58 -
[110] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Midnight Hope wrote:The "cytoplasm" option in the Cytoplasm section says that the stain should be everywhere "except in the nucleus (blue marker)".
If the markers should be everywhere BUT the blue, then, if I select it, any option for the nucleus should be disabled. But this is not the case, which indicates that I CAN select something for the nucleus even though this option says there should be nothing in it.
Is that right? Should the wording for this option be clarified or should the game disable all the nucleus options if you pick this one for the cytoplasm? If you have a staining in the nucleus... Well then it's a nuclear staining there, not cytoplasm. They are not mutually exclusive. I It's just that if you see smt in the nucleus - it's not (or more than) cytoplasm. I understand what you mean, but you should see it as separate stainings (cyto and nucleus). Um, I kinda have a problem expressing exactly what I mean, but hope you'll understand me.
I think I do, then the WORDING of the cytoplasm option should me clarified since it is possible to pick that option and STIL have staining in the nucleus (blue marker) |
|
Axhind
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
100
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:04:49 -
[111] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:First, you're looking at a 3D cell that's been flattened somewhat, not a 2D slice of a cell, so cytoplasm could be above and below and around the nucleus, and in the image it will appear to be IN the nucleus. Like a semi-transparent fish, its liver is not IN its stomach, but from the side it could appear that way.
Second, you can have the markers bind separately to cytoplasm AND to something in the nucleus. So in that case you should see the cytoplasm pattern around the nucleus (and maybe more faded overlapping the nucleus), and you should be able to identify a pattern for what's in the nucleus as matching one of the nuclear patterns.
Basically, if you see strong cytoplasm green outside the nucleus and weak "inside" the nucleus, then it's just cytoplasm. If you see cytoplasm green, and the blue area clearly has the green nucleoli spheres, and you actually see spheres and not just fuzzy green, then their green dye has reacted with the cytoplasm AND the nucleoli, so you check both. I should have read this more carefully before posting, great explanation!!
So these are not confocal images but normal microscopy? |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
446
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:07:12 -
[112] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now. Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday. LOL if it makes you feel any better I seem to be stuck at 60%...
I'm at 40% now.
Apparently I have this really bad luck where I choose something, but the real solution is a completely different , just similar looking thing.
Right now the mini-game traps me like this all the time. Two more ways I fail:
1.) I think I have found and marked everything, but it turns out just one tiny thing was wanted, everything else was apparently just an hallucination on my part and I lose accuracy, even if I actually did find the right thing.
2.) When I'm lured into thinking there's this just one really tiny thing the game wants marked, it turns out there are multiple other thinks I misinterpreted. I lose tons of accuracy.
Welp, the way this is going my work for science is done shortly. |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:13:27 -
[113] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now. Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday. LOL if it makes you feel any better I seem to be stuck at 60%... I'm at 40% now. Apparently I have this really bad luck where I choose something, but the real solution is a completely different , just similar looking thing. Right now the mini-game traps me like this all the time. Two more ways I fail: 1.) I think I have found and marked everything, but it turns out just one tiny thing was wanted, everything else was apparently just an hallucination on my part and I lose accuracy, even if I actually did find the right thing. 2.) When I'm lured into thinking there's this just one really tiny thing the game wants marked, it turns out there are multiple other thinks I misinterpreted. I lose tons of accuracy. Welp, the way this is going my work for science is done shortly.
Hehe, might wanna check out this reddit? Vid tutorial upload that ppl are praising!
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProjectDiscovery/comments/49yyt3/project_discovery_how_to_classify_samples/ |
Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
446
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:18:02 -
[114] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now. Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday. LOL if it makes you feel any better I seem to be stuck at 60%... I'm at 40% now. Apparently I have this really bad luck where I choose something, but the real solution is a completely different , just similar looking thing. Right now the mini-game traps me like this all the time. Two more ways I fail: 1.) I think I have found and marked everything, but it turns out just one tiny thing was wanted, everything else was apparently just an hallucination on my part and I lose accuracy, even if I actually did find the right thing. 2.) When I'm lured into thinking there's this just one really tiny thing the game wants marked, it turns out there are multiple other thinks I misinterpreted. I lose tons of accuracy. Welp, the way this is going my work for science is done shortly. Hehe, might wanna check out this reddit? Vid tutorial upload that ppl are praising! https://www.reddit.com/r/ProjectDiscovery/comments/49yyt3/project_discovery_how_to_classify_samples/
Just in case, does that help with that weird bug where the sample isn't loading and I get punished for leaving and restarting?
A lot of times I also run into cases where what I've chosen is clearly visible in the sample, but instead something else (and clearly wrong) is marked as right.
That second case could of course just be my ignorance in Biology, there's probably some arcane knowledge I'm missing.
Anyway, I'll try that link, maybe it helps.
By the way, if I my input gets discarded because of my many errors, do I get a message? I would like to stop playing then. |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:23:45 -
[115] - Quote
Owen Levanth wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Owen Levanth wrote:Nice mini-game, but hell am I bad at it. I've dropped pretty damn fast in just half an hour. I'm at something like 44% accuracy now. Hopefully I do better tomorrow, or I'll reach 0% sometime on Tuesday. LOL if it makes you feel any better I seem to be stuck at 60%... I'm at 40% now. Apparently I have this really bad luck where I choose something, but the real solution is a completely different , just similar looking thing. Right now the mini-game traps me like this all the time. Two more ways I fail: 1.) I think I have found and marked everything, but it turns out just one tiny thing was wanted, everything else was apparently just an hallucination on my part and I lose accuracy, even if I actually did find the right thing. 2.) When I'm lured into thinking there's this just one really tiny thing the game wants marked, it turns out there are multiple other thinks I misinterpreted. I lose tons of accuracy. Welp, the way this is going my work for science is done shortly. Hehe, might wanna check out this reddit? Vid tutorial upload that ppl are praising! https://www.reddit.com/r/ProjectDiscovery/comments/49yyt3/project_discovery_how_to_classify_samples/ Just in case, does that help with that weird bug where the sample isn't loading and I get punished for leaving and restarting? A lot of times I also run into cases where what I've chosen is clearly visible in the sample, but instead something else (and clearly wrong) is marked as right. That second case could of course just be my ignorance in Biology, there's probably some arcane knowledge I'm missing. Anyway, I'll try that link, maybe it helps. By the way, if I my input gets discarded because of my many errors, do I get a message? I would like to stop playing then.
What I've heard reg. the weird bug is that it's due to overload of the server.
Don't know about error, but will ask CCP_Wonderboy to reply to this post! |
Youkai Tengu
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 21:03:29 -
[116] - Quote
Seen this several times now: http://puu.sh/nD4Wz/c4ed499b12.jpg
There should be a better example of what it is. - Looks a bit like aggresome, but doesn't fit the text description at all. - Looks very much like one of the endoplasmic reticulum examples, but: "A symmetrical structure..." No, not symmetrical at all. The two first examples in the option doesn't show any symmetry, either. The last two, however, does. Doesn't look like a web, either. Wording should be changed in that, as well as several other options. |
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 21:06:09 -
[117] - Quote
Youkai Tengu wrote:Seen this several times now: http://puu.sh/nD4Wz/c4ed499b12.jpg There should be a better example of what it is. - Looks a bit like aggresome, but doesn't fit the text description at all. - Looks very much like one of the endoplasmic reticulum examples, but: "A symmetrical structure..." No, not symmetrical at all. The two first examples in the option doesn't show any symmetry, either. The last two, however, does. Doesn't look like a web, either. Wording should be changed in that, as well as several other options.
What you see in the image is a typical intermediate filament. I think the last of the example images should be somewhat similar to it. |
Youkai Tengu
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 21:13:17 -
[118] - Quote
HPA Illuminator wrote:Youkai Tengu wrote:Seen this several times now: http://puu.sh/nD4Wz/c4ed499b12.jpg There should be a better example of what it is. - Looks a bit like aggresome, but doesn't fit the text description at all. - Looks very much like one of the endoplasmic reticulum examples, but: "A symmetrical structure..." No, not symmetrical at all. The two first examples in the option doesn't show any symmetry, either. The last two, however, does. Doesn't look like a web, either. Wording should be changed in that, as well as several other options. What you see in the image is a typical intermediate filament. I think the last of the example images should be somewhat similar to it.
You're absolutely right! |
|
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2016.03.12 05:41:14 -
[119] - Quote
Axhind wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:First, you're looking at a 3D cell that's been flattened somewhat, not a 2D slice of a cell, so cytoplasm could be above and below and around the nucleus, and in the image it will appear to be IN the nucleus. Like a semi-transparent fish, its liver is not IN its stomach, but from the side it could appear that way.
Second, you can have the markers bind separately to cytoplasm AND to something in the nucleus. So in that case you should see the cytoplasm pattern around the nucleus (and maybe more faded overlapping the nucleus), and you should be able to identify a pattern for what's in the nucleus as matching one of the nuclear patterns.
Basically, if you see strong cytoplasm green outside the nucleus and weak "inside" the nucleus, then it's just cytoplasm. If you see cytoplasm green, and the blue area clearly has the green nucleoli spheres, and you actually see spheres and not just fuzzy green, then their green dye has reacted with the cytoplasm AND the nucleoli, so you check both. I should have read this more carefully before posting, great explanation!! So these are not confocal images but normal microscopy?
No, you're right. Confocal images, so first paragraph not entirely correct. But if the optical sectioning was done close to the nucleus /cytoplasm interface there can be some bleed through. |
|
HPA Illuminator
State War Academy Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2016.03.12 05:42:47 -
[120] - Quote
Midnight Hope wrote:HPA Illuminator wrote:Midnight Hope wrote:The "cytoplasm" option in the Cytoplasm section says that the stain should be everywhere "except in the nucleus (blue marker)".
If the markers should be everywhere BUT the blue, then, if I select it, any option for the nucleus should be disabled. But this is not the case, which indicates that I CAN select something for the nucleus even though this option says there should be nothing in it.
Is that right? Should the wording for this option be clarified or should the game disable all the nucleus options if you pick this one for the cytoplasm? If you have a staining in the nucleus... Well then it's a nuclear staining there, not cytoplasm. They are not mutually exclusive. I It's just that if you see smt in the nucleus - it's not (or more than) cytoplasm. I understand what you mean, but you should see it as separate stainings (cyto and nucleus). Um, I kinda have a problem expressing exactly what I mean, but hope you'll understand me. I think I do, then the WORDING of the cytoplasm option should me clarified since it is possible to pick that option and STIL have staining in the nucleus (blue marker)
Makes sense, and I'll fwd the input. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |