The Flow Cytometry Shared Resource Laboratory: Best practices to assure a high‐quality, cost‐effective partnership with biomedical research laboratories

Abstract

Recognizing the changing landscape of biomedicalresearch, the NIH leadership put forth in 2003 the ‘‘NIHRoadmap.’’ This process sought to examine both intramuraland extramural processes necessary to accelerate scientific pro-gress (1). Although these guidelines were primarily aimed atre-engineering the NIH mission, several concepts emergedthat are broadly applicable to biomedical research as a whole.One of these concepts was that contemporary 21st centuryresearchers need broad access to technologies that can facili-tate the research enterprise. It was recognized that a successfulbridge between the research scientist and the technological sci-entific resources that have exploded on the scene was critical.Today’s technologies are rapidly evolving and embrace sophis-ticated and complex approaches. Indeed, technology may bethe primary driver of advances in biomedical research in the21st century. This has necessitated the evolution of the SharedResource Laboratory (SRL), a ‘‘core’’ resource that provideshighly skilled technology scientists and advanced instrumenta-tion to enhance the scope and quality of biomedical research.We specifically adopt the term ‘‘SRL’’ to connote the addi-tional scientific and collaborative capabilities and responsibil-ities that such a facility has compared with a service core. Therole of these laboratories has moved beyond the simple provi-sion of technical services to making complex experiments pos-sible by providing scientific and technological support forimplementing advanced high-dimensional approaches inexperimentation and by creating a mechanism for acquisitionof new methodologies.Flow cytometry and image analysis are among the morecomplex technologies in use in biological laboratories today.The complexities are at many levels, including instrumenta-tion, experimental design, data analysis, and data interpreta-tion. Given these complexities, together with the high cost ofthe instrumentation, many institutions have judiciously cho-sen the SRL approach for providing communal access to thetechnology to support the research endeavor. Such laborato-ries provide a broader range of expertise, service, and techno-logical advancement than would be feasible for individualinvestigators. A highly functioning SRL can be a significantasset to an institution, both scientifically and economically;however, creating and maintaining a successful and effectiveSRL requires both intellectual and financial investment. Themost successful SRLs acknowledge that they have a number ofresponsibilities, including instrument selection, quality assur-ance (QA), consultation on experimental design, active parti-cipation in experiment implementation, assurance of dataquality and appropriate interpretation, assistance with grantand manuscript preparation, education of users in the theoryand practice of flow cytometry, and research and developmentof new paradigms, applications, and tools.Here, we present our perspective on some of the basicresponsibilities of an effective SRL, and further discuss a seriesof best practices necessary to assure success (Table 1). Finally,we offer our ‘‘roadmap’’ for institutions seeking to create (orenhance) Flow Cytometry Shared Resource Laboratories byidentifying seven key aspects of an SRL. Although we focus onflow cytometry, our principles can easily be applied to anycomplex technology shared resource.Finally, much of this perspective is based on the authors’experiences in their institutions. The models we propose herework well at both institutions, despite the dramatic differencein size (seven instruments serving eight laboratory groupswith 50 users vs. 18 instruments serving 250 laboratory groupswith over 600 users), focus (basic research vs. basic and clini-cal research), expertise (primarily postdoctoral fellows vs. stu-dents, fellows, clinical fellows, and technicians), and funding(intramural vs. grant-supported).