Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 192

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Elucidation of seventeen human peripheral blood B‐cell subsets and quantification of the tetanus response using a density‐based method for the automated identification of cell populations in multidimensional flow cytometry data

Open access
Qian, Yu, Wei, Chungwen, Eun‐Hyung Lee, F., Campbell, John, Halliley, Jessica, Lee, Jamie A., Cai, Jennifer, Kong, Y. Megan, Sadat, Eva, Thomson, Elizabeth, Dunn, Patrick, Seegmiller, Adam C., Karandikar, Nitin J., Tipton, Christopher M., Mosmann, Tim, Sanz, Iñaki, Scheuermann, Richard H.·2010·Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry

Abstract

Background: Advances in multiparameter flow cytometry (FCM) now allow for the independent detection of larger numbers of fluorochromes on individual cells, generating data with increasingly higher dimensionality. The increased complexity of these data has made it difficult to identify cell populations from high‐dimensional FCM data using traditional manual gating strategies based on single‐color or two‐color displays. Methods: To address this challenge, we developed a novel program, FLOCK (FLOw Clustering without K), that uses a density‐based clustering approach to algorithmically identify biologically relevant cell populations from multiple samples in an unbiased fashion, thereby eliminating operator‐dependent variability. Results: FLOCK was used to objectively identify seventeen distinct B‐cell subsets in a human peripheral blood sample and to identify and quantify novel plasmablast subsets responding transiently to tetanus and other vaccinations in peripheral blood. FLOCK has been implemented in the publically available Immunology Database and Analysis Portal—ImmPort (http://www.immport.org)—for open use by the immunology research community. Conclusions: FLOCK is able to identify cell subsets in experiments that use multiparameter FCM through an objective, automated computational approach. The use of algorithms like FLOCK for FCM data analysis obviates the need for subjective and labor‐intensive manual gating to identify and quantify cell subsets. Novel populations identified by these computational approaches can serve as hypotheses for further experimental study. © 2010 International Clinical Cytometry Society

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cyto.b.20554

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 192

Metadata

Authors
Qian, Y., Wei, C., Eun‐Hyung Lee, F., Campbell, J., Halliley, J., Lee, J. A., Cai, J., Kong, Y. M., Sadat, E., Thomson, E., Dunn, P., Seegmiller, A. C., Karandikar, N. J., Tipton, C. M., Mosmann, T., Sanz, I., & Scheuermann, R. H.
Venue
Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-01
Volume
78B
Issue
S1
Pages
S69-82
ISSN
  • 1552-4949 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4957
OpenAlex
W1989838792
Cited by
192
References
3
FWCI
5.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Elucidation of seventeen human peripheral blood B‐cell subsets and quantification of the tetanus response using a density‐based method for the automated identification of cell populations in multidimensional flow cytometry data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cyto.b.20554
The paper
Qian, Y., Wei, C., Eun‐Hyung Lee, F., Campbell, J., Halliley, J., Lee, J. A., Cai, J., Kong, Y. M., Sadat, E., Thomson, E., Dunn, P., Seegmiller, A. C., Karandikar, N. J., Tipton, C. M., Mosmann, T., Sanz, I., & Scheuermann, R. H. (2010). Elucidation of seventeen human peripheral blood B‐cell subsets and quantification of the tetanus response using a density‐based method for the automated identification of cell populations in multidimensional flow cytometry data. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.b.20554

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.