Use a sharp blade such as this one, which has a handle with replaceable blades. Handles and blades are available from vendors of histology and pathology supplies.Tissues must be trimmed to a thickness that will allow them to be completely permeated with paraffin, and to provide the orientation needed. We suggest "thick as a nickel" as a thumb rule. Some mouse organs are small enough that they are best embedded whole.
If there is an area of particular interest, such as a tumor, in the specimen, trim the tissue so that the area of interest is near one surface of the specimen, and place that surface down in the cassette.Be sure to let the histotechs know if the area of interest is very small to ensure that it is not lost or missed. Be advised that it is very difficult to trim and embed tissues so precisely that it can be determined before sectioning which sections will contain such areas. In such cases it is advisable to request serial sectioning and to save all sections until you're certain you've obtained the information you need. Blocks can always be cut deeper, but discarded sections are gone forever.Don't place too many tissues in the cassette. Overcrowding can inhibit proper processing, and it isn't possible to get that many tissues positioned in the block for good sectioning anyway. This one should have about 1/2 or 2/3 of the amount of tissue shown. As a general rule, place tissues of similar consistency together. For example, don't place tough tissues such as skin in the same cassette as soft tissues such as spleen or brain. If the tissues vary greatly in consistency, they may not all section well.If the tissue is very small, biopsy pads can be used to help prevent the specimen from being lost. Biopsy cassettes with fine screens also are available. Biopsy pads also can be used to prevent samples of skin and hollow organs from curling during fixation, but care must be taken not to compress or distort the tissue.In general, biopsy pads should not be used with larger tissue samples. However, they can be used to maintain orientation or positioning of trimmed samples, as distortion is of less concern with fixed solid tissues. (See the examples on the Special processing & embedding page.)
The latest NIH eSubmission Items of Interest for July 28, 2016 is now available.
Review the attached PDF or visit the NIH eSubmission Items of Interest website for more information.
The University Compliance Office announces publication of the July 2016 issue of their quarterly newsletter, Compliance 411.
Among the topics in this issue are Responsible Conduct of Research at UAB; new Recertification of Effort Form and process; a profile of Research Integrity Officer Pam Bounelis, PhD; defining fabrication, falsification and plagiarism; new research data management requirements; and the new chemical inventory system.
Your comments and feedback regarding Compliance 411 are welcome; please contact email@example.com.
Effective July 1, 2016, the Recertification of Effort Form will be used for recertifying a previously certified effort report and certifying a delinquent effort report. The Recertification of Effort Form, which replaces the form entitled ORC Review Request (commonly referred to as a "request to recertify effort"/"RFR"), is listed as follows on the Financial Affairs forms site:
The new form was drafted with considerable feedback from stakeholders on campus. Enhancements to the form include:
In addition, there is a routing change. The effort recertification forms are to be forwarded directly to Financial Affairs by the Dean’s offices upon completion and approval rather than to the University Compliance Office (UCO). If you have any questions regarding this new process change, please contact the University Compliance Office at (205) 996-6540.
Currently, Fee for Service (FFS) agreements are processed at UAB by University Contracts and are assessed a 5% of revenue administrative processing fee. As Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs are not currently assessed on those FFS activities related to research, UAB academic units do not receive any F&A distributions in support of their research missions, despite the fact that these FFS activities result in true research infrastructure expenses. In addition, current FFS activities are not counted toward UAB’s national metrics on research expenditures (e.g., NSF HERD, etc).
As such, and consistent with practices of peer institutions, all agreements (and contract renewals) with terms beginning on or after July 1, 2016 for research-related FFS contracts will be processed by the Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) and be assessed F&A at a rate of 30% on cash received. Budgets for research-related FFS contracts should include recovery of full direct costs in accordance with the University’s Direct Costs Policy (available on Financial Affairs website) and the appropriate F&A rate as described above.
The UAB Office of Sponsored Programs is pleased to announce the newly revised procedure for review of NIH proposal submissions for large submission deadlines involving NIH Research Project Grants (R01), Research Career Development Awards (K) and Research Fellowship (F) proposals. In order to review NIH proposals as quickly as possible, OSP has implemented a proposal review pool which will allow OSP to introduce additional reviewers to assist with proposal review when needed.
NIH proposal submissions to OSP for deadline dates of June 5th and July 5th (R01), June 12th and July 12th (K) and August 8th and 13th (F), will be assigned rotating through a pool of reviewers instead of an assignment to a specific officer by department. The reviewer will be identified in the Receipt of Submission email once a complete submission is received by OSP. This change is effective immediately.
NOTE: This is only applicable to new NIH proposal submissions for the above mentioned NIH deadlines. All other NIH proposal submission deadlines will be routed to the officer assigned to your specific department. All NIH awards will continue to be processed by the OSP officer assigned to your specific area.
Please continue to follow the OSP Review Plan to ensure that your reviewer has sufficient time to properly review the proposal.
Please forward any questions regarding the NIH proposal review process to Tim Parker at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com.