So, a question of mine: Recommended applications for commercial antibodies was edited to add the immunology tag. I'm all in favour of improving the tagging (my original ones were fairly pathetic) but this strikes me as muddying the waters.

I would interpret immunology as being to do with studying the workings of the immune system, whereas this question was about experimental protocols that happen to make use of immune system processes without investigating them.

So I've deleted that tag for now, though I won't fight the point further. But maybe we could do with an immunocytochemistry tag or something like that? I'm not sure that quite fits either...


2 Answers 2


I agree with you that definitely immunology is irrelevant in your case. I would either go for something a tad generic like techniques or I actually quite like staining.

Otherwise we could choose of having ICC and IHC tags, which I would hope would be quite common anyway.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I suspect that staining is too broad to be really useful, you can stain tissues, cells, proteins, RNA, DNA ... and most of those methods are pretty different. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 18, 2011 at 11:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, but that's why you have multiple tags... $\endgroup$
    – nico
    Commented Dec 18, 2011 at 11:53

I agree that is not the right tag for asking about the usage of antibodies in the lab.

For questions about antibody use in the lab the tag might be good enough. This specific question is not about any technique in particular, so that is the only tag that fits.

Though I think in most cases the tag that should be used would be the specific technique that is used, for example , or .


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .