Which is not a possible cause of the artifact in the image?

• A. Using a dull blade
• B. Inadequate dehydration
• C. Improper embedding
• D. Wrong fixative

Answer: (A)

The issue in the image is most consistent with a processing-related artifact rather than a cutting problem. A dull blade affects the physical sectioning and would show as mechanical damage such as tearing, edge chatter, or ragged margins along the cut. Those signs aren’t what’s depicted here, so this artifact isn’t due to the blade.

Inadequate dehydration leaves residual water in the tissue, which interferes with proper paraffin infiltration and clearing. That can produce sections that don’t mount cleanly or stain unevenly, matching the kind of artifact seen when dehydration steps were insufficient.

Improper embedding, where infiltration or orientation isn’t ideal, can cause folds, compression, or distortion within the section. Such issues produce artifacts that reflect poor support and alignment during embedding, which can mimic the image pattern.

Wrong fixative causes fixation-related changes: overfixation leads to excessive cross-linking and poor stain uptake, while underfixation allows autolysis and consumer-grade morphology changes. These produce staining and structural artifacts consistent with the image.

So, the artifact isn’t explained by a dull blade, but by issues in dehydration, embedding, or fixation—processing steps that alter tissue morphology and staining more than the cutting process does.