Anti-Mouse CD96 – Purified in vivo GOLD™ Functional Grade

Clone 3.3 is a monoclonal antibody used for in vivo blocking of CD96 (also known as TACTILE), a key molecule involved in immune regulation in mice.

In mouse studies, Clone 3.3 is principally used to:

• Block CD96 function in vivo, enabling investigation of its role in immune cell adhesion, cytotoxicity, and cancer immunotherapy.
• Suppress primary tumor growth as demonstrated in experimental mouse tumor models.

Key applications in vivo:

• Administered to mice to inhibit CD96, particularly on NK cells and T cells, to assess effects on immune response and tumor progression.
• Utilized in tumor metastasis studies and mechanistic cancer immunotherapy models, where blocking CD96 can alter immune cell interactions with target cells.
• Supplied at ultra-high purity and low endotoxin levels to ensure compatibility in mouse models, minimizing immune reactions unrelated to the experimental hypothesis.

Controls and preparation:

• Experiments using Clone 3.3 typically include isotype controls such as rat IgG1 to confirm specificity of immune response.
• Antibody is dissolved in specialized buffers (pH 7.0), rigorously tested for absence of contaminants and murine pathogens, ensuring safety and reproducibility in vivo.

If you are referencing "clone 3.3" in the context of mouse genetics or stem cell cloning rather than monoclonal antibodies, note that the term in research typically denotes a specific monoclonal antibody clone rather than a genetically cloned mouse line. For mouse stem cell or genetic clone models, the procedures and applications differ significantly.

The specific antibody referred to as "3.3" in your query is ambiguous, as “3.3” on its own is not a standard designation for a commonly known antibody or protein in the literature. The context (e.g., target protein, disease area, or experimental use) is essential to identify associated or co-used antibodies. For clarity, I will address general approaches and commonly paired antibodies or proteins, as described in research literature, especially when working with antibody-based experiments or multimodal assays.

Commonly Used Antibodies and Proteins in Research:

• Immunoglobulin Isotypes: Different antibody subclasses, such as IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4, are often used with other antibodies (e.g., IgA, IgM, etc.) for isotype controls, multiplexing, or subclass-specific effects in immunological research.
• Secondary Antibodies: These detect primary antibodies like "3.3" (if monoclonal or polyclonal) and are typically anti-mouse IgG, anti-rabbit IgG, etc., conjugated to enzymes or fluorophores for detection in assays such as Western blot, ELISA, and immunofluorescence.
• Protein Markers and Controls:
  • Housekeeping proteins (e.g., GAPDH, ?-actin) are frequently probed alongside target antibodies to normalize protein loading in quantitative experiments.
  • Tag antibodies (e.g., anti-HA, anti-Myc, anti-His) are used when the protein of interest is expressed using a tagged construct.
• Complementary or Functional Partners: Multicolor flow cytometry or co-immunoprecipitation often involves using multiple antibodies that recognize ?-chain partners, cell-type markers (e.g., CD3, CD8, CD45, CD19), or interaction partners for the protein targeted by "3.3."
• Fusion or Multifunctional Proteins: In the case of engineered or multiplexed reagents (e.g., bispecific/trifunctional antibodies), antibodies are combined with cytokines (such as IL-15, IL-21), or engineered for cross-isotype or cross-subtype functions to enhance or diversify effector mechanisms.

If "3.3" refers to a Multispecific/Trifunctional Antibody:

• Trifunctional or bispecific antibodies are often studied together with other antibody formats (such as scFv, VHH, IgG) and cytokines, or in comparison to monospecific antibodies for functional analysis.
• Such studies may include paired detection antibodies, isotype controls, or competitors targeting adjacent epitopes.

Key Points:

• Common antibodies or proteins co-used depend on the experimental context (immunodetection, immunotherapy, multiplexing).
• If you have a specific target or system (e.g., “3.3” is anti-CD3, anti-?3 integrin, or a different target), established literature often pairs it with other lineage, activation, or functional markers.
• For antibody drug conjugates, different mAbs, linkers, and small molecules (e.g., trastuzumab-T-DM1) are studied together to compare aggregation propensity and efficacy.

Please provide the full identity or target of "3.3" for more precise information on commonly used antibodies or proteins paired with it in the literature.

Based on the provided search results, I cannot find specific information about "clone 3.3 citations" in scientific literature. The search results contain information about code clone evolution research and recurrent neural networks for clone detection, but do not reference any specific citation system or findings related to "clone 3.3."

Code Clone Evolution Research

The search results do reveal key findings from systematic literature reviews on code clone evolution and detection:

Performance of Clone Detection Techniques: Recent research has shown significant improvements in detecting challenging clone types. Studies using Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) have demonstrated enhanced performance in identifying Type-III and Type-IV clones, which are known for their inherent identification complexity. The DFS technique by Ullah et al. achieved exceptional performance with precision, recall, and F1-score values of 99.4%, 99.5%, and 99.4% respectively on the OJClone dataset.

Evolution of Detection Methods: There has been notable improvement in clone detection performance over time, with relatively lower F-Score values in 2017 and 2018 attributed to the early stage of development for deep learning techniques in this domain. More recent approaches have shown substantially better results across multiple benchmarks.

Research Focus Areas: The systematic literature review identified 47 research works in code clone evolution, covering topics such as automatic identification of important clones for refactoring, evolutionary coupling of cloned code, bug propagation through code cloning, and inconsistent changes in code clones.

If you are looking for information about a specific citation format, numbering system, or particular research findings labeled as "clone 3.3," please provide additional context or clarify what specific aspect of clone research you're interested in exploring.

Dosing regimens for clone 3.3 can vary substantially depending on the mouse model, the targeted biological pathway, the experimental aim (such as depletion versus activation), and study-specific factors. However, direct, detailed information on "clone 3.3" specifically is not available in the provided search results; commonly referenced clones for in vivo antibody dosing (e.g., anti-CTLA-4 9H10, 9D9) are described with standardized dosing guidance in mouse models.

General insights for antibody clone dosing in mouse models include:

• Typical Dose Range: Most in vivo antibodies (including functionally similar clones) are dosed at 100–250??g per mouse, often by intraperitoneal injection.
• Dosing Frequency: The regimen is commonly every 3 days, but can vary depending on antibody half-life and desired duration of immune modulation.
• Strain Differences: Dosing can differ by mouse strain (e.g., BALB/c, C3HeB/FeJ) due to variations in disease susceptibility, drug metabolism, or immune response.
• Regimen Adjustment: For some studies, multiple low doses are aggregated over a time window to allow comparison with human exposure, reflecting that total dose over a "cycle" may be more relevant than frequency alone.
• Experimental Factors: The disease model (e.g., tumor type, infection), therapeutic combination, and whether the clone acts to deplete or block are all critical for regimen design.

Illustrative comparisons in mouse models (with non-clone 3.3 antibodies):

Key context:

• In some infectious disease models (e.g., TB chemotherapy), regimens are adjusted for chronic versus acute infection, and BALB/c and C3HeB/FeJ strains show different pharmacodynamic responses even when dosed identically.
• Investigators sometimes aggregate dose over several administrations (e.g., 2.5?mg/kg every 4 days × 4 in mice as 10?mg/kg total) for cross-species or cross-study comparison.
• Detailed optimization is guided by pilot studies and published literature closest in mechanism to the tested clone.

If information specifically about "clone 3.3" is required (for example, in reference to a unique or less common antibody clone), consult the original product datasheet or recent primary literature, as guidelines above reflect standard practice for in vivo antibodies with similar use cases, but not this named clone directly.