What is Aeonian Rating® ?
Aeonian Biotech provides an effective solution to the problem of finding fit-for-purpose antibodies in the commercial market. This market is complicated due to:
- The offering of identical products across many global catalogues
- The false claims of being fit for certain applications
- The limited availability over time (Voskuil, 2014).
On top of that, there is global unclarity about how to validate a commercial antibody before using it in a scientific project or during assay development (Voskuil et al, 2020).
Such complications, and other ones (see below), are addressed with the use of our proprietary Aeonian Rating®. It acts as a stringent filter to identify the correct antibodies according to the requirements of the customer. The filter is applied to the data presented on the original manufacturer’s product sheet. All of the relevant information about the product, including formulation, clonality, and disclosure of the epitope, when known, are taken into account together with the performance data (demonstration of specificity and selectivity in immunoassays such as WB, IHC, ICC, etc.). Thus, the Aeonian Rating® is based on the combination of the performance-independent specifics and the performance-related specifics (Voskuil, 2017).
Our Aeonian Rating® quality criteria
- The epitope or immunizing peptide is disclosed unless convincing validation data are available.
- The formulation and concentration of purified IgG is disclosed and defined (we do not deal with serum, plasma, culture supernatant and ascitic fluid/ascites).
- The batch code is disclosed and the specified batch is proven available in sufficient quantities. We will check with the provider.
- QC data and application codes on the product sheet are manually vetted on scientific integrity. A claimed application not demonstrated by convincing data or literature is dismissed.
- We aim to find antibodies with Aeonian quality, weighted with a maximum of AR100 (Aeonian Rating®) based on the criteria set out above. Antibodies that can be rated as AR100 are expected to emerge in the next 5-10 years to take over the entire market.
- All antibodies we source are from the original manufacturer, unless licensed in.
What makes the Aeonian Rating® unique?
Unlike the ratings used by competing catalogues, our Aeonian Rating® is not influenced by the number of applications the antibody is claimed fit for. Instead, the quality of the data to demonstrate fitness is essential. For example, a monoclonal antibody shown fit in multiple applications but offered as a culture supernatant (hybridoma-conditioned medium), is not even considered for our catalogue, while the one shown fit for one single application (e.g. demonstrated by quality data on WB or on IHC) and offered in the correct formulation will be rated much higher. The quality data must be convincing, clearly demonstrating at least specificity. Inclusion of appropriate controls increases the rating of the product. The highest rating is for demonstration of selectivity on top of specificity.
A recombinant monoclonal antibody with known epitope reaches Aeonian Rating® 100 when it shows convincing evidence of specificity and selectivity in at least one application type, for example in WB. The selectivity may be tested in a protein array containing, next to the intended target protein, also closely related other proteins. A selective antibody shows no cross-reactivity. An alternative method to demonstrate selectivity is to compare wild type tissue or cell types with those after an artificial knockout, or knockdown, or with tissue or cell types that naturally do not express the target, while still expressing the target-related proteins.
How we grow our catalogue
An antibody can be rated maximally 100 when it meets all Aeonian quality requirements. This is extremely rare. We accept antibodies to our catalogue from Aeonian Rating® 70 and above. This requirement rules out antibodies without known quantity and antibodies without proper performance data.
We will not report species cross-reactivity until there is data to demonstrate it. Likewise, when an antibody was claimed fit for FC, but there is only WB, ICC, or IHC data presented, the FC will not be reported on our catalogue as a fit application until proven fit by publication. IHC data on wrong tissues will be disregarded. For example, an antibody specific to a brain protein may have been tested in lung or liver tissue slides. Such data will not be presented and IHC will not be reported to be a positively tested application in that case.
Antibody Registry
The need for an authentication of key biological/chemical resources has prompted the creation of the Research Resource IDentifiers (RRID, Bandrowski 2016). Publishers increasingly insist on the use of this unique identification system. We, and only a few competing catalogues, persistently provide all our catalogue products with a registration code. The RRID system can be accessed through SciCrunch or directly through the Antibody Registry.
The above approach makes our catalogue and our proprietary Aeonian Rating® unique and therefore we are the best port of call for those in need of specific and selective antibodies. If we don’t have the required antibody on offer, we probably haven’t released it yet. A quick contact with us could save endless and costly searches.
Sign up to become a member to have access to publicly restricted information pages and a 10% discount on our catalogue items.
Abbreviations:
FC: Flow Cytometry
ICC: Immunocytochemistry
IHC: Immunohistochemistry
WB: Western Blot
Literature
Voskuil (2014) Commercial antibodies and their validation. F1000Res. 3:232.
Voskuil JLA, Bandrowski A, Begley CG, Bradbury ARM, Chalmers AD, Gomes AV, Hardcastle T, Lund-Johansen F, Plückthun A, Roncador G, Solache A, Taussig MJ, Trimmer JS, Williams C, Goodman SL. (2020) The Antibody Society’s antibody validation webinar series. MAbs.12(1):1794421.
Voskuil (2017) The challenges with the validation of research antibodies. F1000Res 6:161.
Bandrowski AE, Martone ME. (2016) RRIDs: a simple step toward improving reproducibility through rigor and transparency of experimental methods. Neuron. 2016;90(3):434–36.
