Anoxia-Induced Suspended Animation in Caenorhabditis elegans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some of the most complex biological processes were first elucidated in somewhat “simple” genetic model organisms. For example, where would we be in our molecular and cellular understanding of gene expression, cell division, embryo development and cell death if it were not for research using E. coli, Yeast, Drosophila and C. elegans? Due to the pioneering work by Sydney Brenner and others, the soil nematode C. elegans is now a well-known genetic and developmental model system (Brenner, 1974). Genetic approaches have contributed significantly to our advanced understanding of the mechanisms regulating gene function, organ development, microRNA function and signaling pathways regulating aging and stress (WormBook). The molecular advances and development of genetic tools such as RNA interference (RNAi) and protein expression analysis with the Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) were initially worked out in C. elegans and thus firmly established this organism as a cornerstone of genetic models for unraveling the molecular mechanisms of many biological processes (Chalfie and Kain, 2006; Fraser et al., 2000; Jorgensen and Mango, 2002; Timmons and Fire, 1998). Research from many labs have clearly demonstrated that this small soil nematode has contributed significantly to our understanding of biology and that multiple types of molecular tools exist to elucidate mechanistic details. Further examples of the significant impact C. elegans has had in our understanding of biology are the fairly recent Noble Prize awards to six individuals (S. Brenner, M. Chalfie, A. Fire, R. Horvitz, C. Mello, J. Sulston) who made paradigm shifting discoveries using C. elegans. Through the effort of many within the C. elegans community, the molecular tools and genetic resources available in this model system have helped to address and elucidate the molecular mechanisms regulating multiple biological processes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".